I haven’t been on here in ages but I bet Cherts has nailed 90% of the posts defending the milk snatcher.
Cherts is on Bond Street picking out a proper suit for Corbyn.
HMV on Oxford Street next, for a recording of the national anthem. I’ve told Cherts to keep it traditional, but he insists “JC loves dubstep”, and is accordingly looking for a “halfway house” version of the ditty for the Labour leader.
Story from yesterday.
Whitehall officials secretly plotted to charge disabled people for the right to appeal cruel benefit decisions, the Mirror can reveal today.
An internal Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) paper seen by the Mirror shows the Government also considered stopping people’s benefits altogether pending the outcome of an appeal.
Other plans drawn up by the DWP included slashing appeal times from 12 months to just three, and narrowing the scope of appeal tribunals so that fewer are successful.
The proposals are laid bare in a secret DWP document drawn up last year titled ‘Appeals Strategy – post-election planning 2015’.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/secret-government-plan-charge-disabled-7798786
Originally posted by @pap
Story from yesterday.
Whitehall officials secretly plotted to charge disabled people for the right to appeal cruel benefit decisions, the Mirror can reveal today.
An internal Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) paper seen by the Mirror shows the Government also considered stopping people’s benefits altogether pending the outcome of an appeal.
Other plans drawn up by the DWP included slashing appeal times from 12 months to just three, and narrowing the scope of appeal tribunals so that fewer are successful.
The proposals are laid bare in a secret DWP document drawn up last year titled ‘Appeals Strategy – post-election planning 2015’.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/secret-government-plan-charge-disabled-7798786
Jesus wept, these fucking odious twats. How can somebody who so tragically lost a disabled son so young oversee a government that so viciously goes after the most vulnerable in our society like this? I honestly cannot comprehend that.
I’m sure IDS was crying over this at the time. Manipulative cunt.
Anyway, elsewhere the Tories are showing they have got their fingers firmly on the pulse. That is, if you are a member of the 1% of course.
Transparency? Pah, who wants that.
IFS criticises Government plan to stop publishing wealth data on richest 1 per cent
The respected Institute for Fiscal Studies has criticised Government plans to stop collecting and publishing data about the wealth held by the richest 1 per cent.
HMRC is consulting on whether to stop collecting information derived from inheritance tax receipts showing how the wealthy pass on assets from one generation to the next.
A special issue of the IFS’s house journal Fiscal Studies said the Government was effectively drawing a curtain over the only “window into the wealth of the very richest”.
“Wealth is a key determinant of wellbeing. It matters to households whether they have enough savings to see themselves through retirement and it matters for how they would respond to economic shocks and to fiscal and monetary policy. So understanding the distribution of wealth matters,” the report says.
“So it is concerning that HMRC have consulted on discontinuing their publication of statistics on top shares of wealth, which are derived from data on bequests. These statistics have for decades given us the only, albeit imperfect, window into the wealth of the very richest,” they said.
The wealth of the very richest has come under a renewed spotlight in recent months after the Panama Papers leaks, which exposed the extent to which assets are hidden in offshore trusts.
A spokesman for HMRC said: “We will continue to publish statistics on wealth, but we have asked for views on whether HMRC should continue to produce wealth statistics in the way we currently do as the data we use is derived from inheritance tax information.
“Since 2006 the ONS have issued regular wealth surveys, but based on household assets. We want to streamline this.”
The Government was similarly criticised in the aftermath to last month’s Budget for scrapping a key part of the distributional analysis that shows how tax and spending changes affected the very richest and poorest.
The Chancellor was accused of having “moved the goalposts” on equality by Andrew Tyrie, the respected Conservative MP who chairs the Treasury Select Committee.
George Osborne said the analysis provided “too narrow a perspective” on the effects of cuts and spending.
The Chancellor also declined to release more details about how the new model actually worked – telling Mr Tyrie that he would likely be “disappointed” if he pressed the Treasury for more information.
Mr Osborne himself released some details of his tax arrangements after coming under pressure due to the Panama Papers scandal. David Cameron, John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn, have also released details of their tax returns.
A fantastic opinion piece from Peter Oborne, Tory supporter in the main, about why he will be voting for Sadiq Khan in the upcoming mayoral elections.
He compares the Goldsmith campaign with a couple of other very nasty campaigns, including the 60s Smethwick contest in which the Conservative candidate distributed “If you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour”.
Oborne reckons Goldsmith’s campaign is actually worse. Unlike the vile Smethwick campaign, which was an offence committed by the candidate himself, you’ve got the Prime Minister and the Defence Secretary using the same arguments.
5 Likes
Straight out of the Republican playbook this.
It’s so similar to the campaign that has run incessantly against Obama. It’s founded totally on racism.
It’s so laughable how tranparent this campaign is in trying to divide on racial lines.
ZG: “Hey, white guys! Don’t vote for that Muslim man, he’s basically a terrorist!”.
ZG: “Hey, brown guys! Don’t vote for the that Muslim, I understand you better than him!”
Because, obviously that is the only way people think. Kind of greatful they have gone this route, as it appears to not work in the slightest here in the capital. He’d have stood a far better chance if he avoided this. Sadiq Khan isn’t the most popular politician out there, but such a campaign has just pushed people away from the Tories.
He did seem a weird choice from the outset, if I’m honest. London generally isn’t a very Tory area, save a few pockets (like where I grew up in Ruislip), mostly in the 'burbs. Given a lot of the feeling around Tories, and particularly the privileged nature of them - following an Eton toff like BoJo with Goldsmith, who is basically the same only less likeable (term used loosely) and less charismatic was probably always going to put them on the back foot.
Dunno whether to break the habit of my (admittedly short) voting life and vote Labour, not because I’m overly fond on Khan (I’m far from a fan of his, tbh) but just because do I fuck want another Eton clone running my City ta.
KRG - vote vote vote.
1 Like
i would suggest voting if you aren’t v.busy and have spare time to waste, but don’t worry about it too much. It won’t make any difference.
I’ll be voting, it’s just whether it goes to Mr Kahn or not. As I said, I’m not his biggest fan but I sure as shit don’t want another Tory boy of that ilk in charge.
If it looks close I’ll back Khan, if not then I’ll vote for the candidate I actually prefer.
Originally posted by @KRG
If it looks close I’ll back Khan, if not then I’ll vote for the candidate I actually prefer.
Paul Golding?
1 Like
Rumbled.
Dammit, I thought I’d done so well keeping up the facade.
1 Like
For awhile now, there have been murmurs that not quite all was right with the 2015 election. I’ve seen a few stories in the news about Conservative overspending, which is a criminal offence if they’re found guilty. The Conservatives issued a statement about their battle buses this week, saying that it was a national campaign to boost perceptions of the party.
Step forward Channel 4 news. This could be big. They targeted the marginals.
New evidence appears to show that the Conservative Party bankrolled an operation to bus activists to key marginal seats to campaign for local candidates, Channel 4 News can reveal.
The Conservative Party targeted 20 seats in the Midlands and the North they needed to win to defeat Labour in key marginal seats.
Photographs, social media posts and documents obtained by Channel 4 News undermine claims by the Conservative Party that BattleBus 2015 was a “national campaign” designed to “promote the Party”.
Originally posted by @pap
For awhile now, there have been murmurs that not quite all was right with the 2015 election. I’ve seen a few stories in the news about Conservative overspending, which is a criminal offence if they’re found guilty. The Conservatives issued a statement about their battle buses this week, saying that it was a national campaign to boost perceptions of the party.
Step forward Channel 4 news. This could be big. They targeted the marginals.
New evidence appears to show that the Conservative Party bankrolled an operation to bus activists to key marginal seats to campaign for local candidates, Channel 4 News can reveal.
The Conservative Party targeted 20 seats in the Midlands and the North they needed to win to defeat Labour in key marginal seats.
Photographs, social media posts and documents obtained by Channel 4 News undermine claims by the Conservative Party that BattleBus 2015 was a “national campaign” designed to “promote the Party”.
http://www.channel4.com/news/new-evidence-tories-bankrolled-local-activists-in-marginals
Doubt it, this will be forgotten when news breaks that the Dog on Britains Got Talent is on the take,
How dumb do these pricks think people are?
“Nah guv, never heard of 'im. Not me, no”
Zac Goldsmith repeatedly lobbied ministers on behalf of those campaigning to prevent Babar Ahmad’s extradition, despite claiming to have only heard of him “quite recently,” Politics.co.uk can reveal.
Ahmad, who has since been convicted in the US for “providing material support to terrorism,” was one of several controversial figures which the Conservative party have accused Labour’s Sadiq Khan of “giving cover to” in the past.
Home Secretary Theresa May singled out Khan’s prior association with Ahmad at a joint appearance with Goldsmith earlier this month, saying it was a “worry” for somebody campaigning to be mayor.
Speaking at a debate earlier this month, Goldsmith added that Khan’s support for the campaign against Ahmad’s extradition was an “example of concern” and said that Khan had “campaigned very actively for him.”
When Khan replied that Goldsmith had also campaigned on Ahmad’s behalf, Goldsmith vehemently denied it saying: “To say… I campaigned on behalf of Babar Ahmad, who I had never heard of until quite recently, is an extraordinary thing to say.”
However Politics.co.uk subsequently uncovered video showing Goldsmith speaking about Ahmad’s case back in 2012. He told an anti-extradition meeting that “Babar Ahmad is a story that has caught people’s imagination” adding that he had been “bombarded with letters” about his case.
In fact I can reveal that Goldsmith himself also penned letters on behalf of the campaign for Ahmad.
Correspondence seen by Politics.co.uk reveals that Goldsmith wrote to two government ministers between 2010 and 2012 about Ahmad’s case.
In an email from 2012, Goldsmith tells one of his constituents that he “shares your concerns about [Ahmad’s extradition].”
He adds: “It seems bizarre that we cannot get rid of people like Abu Qatada, but cannot protect others. I have raised the issue of our extradition arrangement with the US, in Parliament, and in letters with Ministers and will continue to pursue this.”
In later correspondence, he adds that he has “raised the issue of our unsatisfactory extradition arrangements with the US on many occasions, and will continue to pursue this particular case.”
Further correspondence obtained by Politics.co.uk reveals that Goldsmith lobbied ministers about Ahmad’s case six years ago. In 2010 he wrote to then counter-terrorism minister Baroness Neville-Jones about the campaign to prevent Ahmad’s extradition to the US.
Neville-Jones replied that it would be “wholly inappropriate” to delay Ahmad’s extradition.
“Failure to comply [with the extradition request] would not only place the UK in breach of these obligations but would also jeopardise the UK’s ability to seek the extradition of persons from other countries,” she added.
Seventeen months later Goldsmith wrote to then immigration minister Damian Green about the case. Green replied that the US was “entitled to seek his extradition.”
One constituent, who contacted Goldsmith about Ahmad’s case, told Politics.co.uk that he was surprised to hear Goldsmith deny knowledge of Ahmad’s case, given his longstanding involvement in the campaign.
The constituent, who does not wish to be named, said that Goldsmith had been a regular visitor to his local mosque in Kingston, where he had built up good relations with people from the local Muslim community, both on this issue and others.
However, he added that those relations were now seriously damaged following Goldsmith’s ‘divisive’ campaign against Khan.
“I was pro-Zac and anti-Sadiq,” they told me.
"Zac has been a good friend to the community. He’s come to our mosque several times. The times I’ve met with him he seemed like a genuinely nice bloke and I thought I could trust him. I spoke to him about housing and he impressed me.
“I was planning to vote for him and I even had raging debates with some of my friends in his defence. He seemed like a known quantity compared to Sadiq and I was ready to back him but how his campaign has gone in recent weeks seems completely out of character. I think the people behind him have taken control.”
Asked about Goldsmith’s ‘extremist links’ allegations against Khan, he replied: “I think he’s trying to ride the current tide of anti-Muslim feeling. It’s very trashy and below the belt. I’m more concerned about issues like schools and housing. We can’t afford to get property now and I wish he would focus on that.”
Asked whether Goldsmith’s campaign would damage relations with the local Muslim community, he replied: “It will strain relations. Me and my friends are very disappointed, saddened and angry that he has decided to take this path.”
A new poll out yesterday suggests that Goldsmith’s extremist allegations against Khan have yet to break through with Londoners. The YouGov poll for the Evening Standard found that Khan has extended his lead to 16% over Goldsmith on first preferences. Khan also had a lead on which candidate “will tackle Islamic extremism” while Goldsmith had a lead on which candidate is more “divisive”.
1 Like
Regardless of the diversional ‘rascism’ debate aspects of the media seem to like to play up – I think there is one thing we can all likely agree on.
They are both cunts.
2 Likes
I’m sure the expenses were just resting in their accounts.
2 Likes
4 Likes
History will not look back kindly at the way people have turned their back on these folk.
It’s shameful.
4 Likes
Can’t wait 'til public space travel is a regular thing, and we can all just fuck off and find ourselves a nice new planet free from these horrible political cunts and start again. 
In establishing our new planet, only Sotonians Rules apply: “Dont be a cunt”.
Might be a few teething problems at first, but nothing that couldn’t be sorted out over match-day beers.
1 Like