What's the point in health & education systems being free if they're of no use to anyone?
They tend to often go hand in hand imo.
Assume you refer to Johnson. If so, absolutely !
So educate people and keeping them healthy in a dirt poor country is no use to anyone who told you this Saddam Hussain, Gadafi? No point educating or keeping them well, so lets just keep all this for ourselves, and let them all die the thick fuckers will know no difference anyway.
But Jezza is a threat to the nation's security!
Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying isn't it?
You're fucking weird.
Weird educating poor people why bother they are dirt poor anyway so why bother? If you educate them they might actual be able to do something, its just best we don't they might start getting ideas beyond themselves.
Damian Green, the leader of the One Nation group of 80 Tory MPs, told the Guardian that Johnson “looked [him] in the eye” as he pledged that he party will not shift to endorsing a no-deal Brexit as the Conservatives’ central policy.
Green said he believed Johnson’s reassurances, after he and Gillian Keegan, James Brokenshire and Victoria Prentis all met the prime minister in Downing Street to deliver the message that large numbers of Tory MPs would find a no-deal policy “unacceptable”. Green said:
We went in to say that no deal as the prime aim of government policy would be unacceptable in a manifesto and we were reassured that wasn’t the prime minister’s aim, that he still wants to get a deal now and still thinks that would be the best outcome. He has no intention of putting a no-deal policy in a manifesto.
This arose from a meeting of the one nation caucus earlier in the week. It was the principle point and we also wanted to be assured again that the Conservative party wouldn’t do a deal with the Brexit party.
We looked each other in the eye. I accept and believe the reassurances.
We accept that no deal has to be a possibility and the one nation caucus has by and large always been supportive of the government’s policy. What we want is for that to continue.”
This is hugely significant:-
I see no way that this lot and the ERG lot can go into an election with a single manifesto. The BoJo government and the ERG have basically been trying to engineer No Deal and have it as a policy but he is saying here the manifesto will be a softer line - no chance. The tories have done a reasonable job of keeping this crack papered over...
Johnson knows if he went to an election on a No Deal ticket he would lose half of his party and his votes. So why not just do the one thing that he is good at lying tell them what they want to hear and try and win the election and then boom manufacture what he is trying to do now only with a majority in parliament, he may be pig ignorant but he ain't stupid.
But the words in the document would be different to how he presents the issue now - he would be shifting from wanting to no deal exit on the 31st of October to wanting a deal and avoiding no deal in the election campaign. That is some shift. The ERG and Farage would call him out on that - you can't have that 2 ways.
Would he go back on this promise and ask these 80 MPs (+others who have similar views) to accept it or stand down. If that is the case he could have over a 100 former Tories standing as independents and all calling him a liar with good reason. That is a third of his former MP's.
He has to pick a side here and it will be either a gift to Labour and the Lib Dems or a gift to Farage.
He has to pick a side
YCMIU
Conservatives appointed (via HMRC) a debt collection agency , APEX Credit Management, to collect unpaid taxes.Its now been revealed / discovered that the parent company of APEX Credit Management are based in the tax haven of Guernsey ....... so they can avoid paying taxes.
Don't the Conservatives do Due diligence?
this has to be a Grayling project somewhere along the line surely lol
Is that Grayling as in a adjective.
The minister Grayling'd the tax collection project by appointing a tax dodging company to outsource the work!
For it to be classed as investment rather than provision is not politically motivated it makes perfect sense economically.A lot of what you say is generally accepted by the majority (e.g. learning all our life) but the current system, to me, appears to be funded in three ways ...
1) The students themselves (if or when they can afford it)
2) The parents of the students (if they can afford it)
3) The state (when 1 & 2 don't cover the cost)
The end effect is that there is no restriction (other than either personal circumstances, perception/misunderstanding of the loan funding mechanism and probable elitism at some institutions). There are more institutions, courses and students today than ever before and it attracts students from across the globe. By all means change the funding to a politically motivated one and watch it fought over for decades by the varying opinions but from what I see (and I was dead against student loans at the outset) I feel the current system works, although there are some issues, such as private & university landlords abusing the rent situation, that should be addressed.
In fairness fella there isnt much reality in all that