Please do not accuse anyone of "deflection" EVER AGAIN.
I’m going with no as the answer to the above.
There was no reference to reviewing sentencing guidelines or implementing better monitoring measures etc in the recent Queen’s Speech that Johnson deemed so necessary either. Can’t imagine why he was suddenly all over the attack. Maybe there is an election on.
And you would be wrong once again.
The bung to the DUP was distasteful I agree, but entirely necessary to keep Jeremy Cretin out of No.10. An objective which justifies any and all actions, I might add. And in the scheme of things the amount was small. So far only a few hundred million has been paid.Now then!!
Think VERY carefully if the Tories managed to find a billion for the DUP and you'll see it was an answer to your whole spiel, not deflection.
That way you'll understand that actually there was money to spend, but the Cons decided to spend it on voting support rather than prop up important services.
Probably had a lot to do with why the mandatory parole legislation was never seriously looked at, I would imagine.Imprisoning people costs significant sums of money. How on earth were the government proposing to fund all this extra prison time in an age of austerity?
I don't doubt that was a significant factor, but that provides no basis whatsoever for the gratuitous display of sententiousness from the **** on the matter, does it?Probably had a lot to do with why the mandatory parole legislation was never seriously looked at, I would imagine.
No, it doesn't. However, Labour (Yvette Cooper) started it.I don't doubt that was a significant factor, but that provides no basis whatsoever for the gratuitous display of sententiousness from the **** on the matter, does it?
Agreed.No, it doesn't. However, Labour (Yvette Cooper) started it.
IMO, it would have been better if the Tories had simply risen above it and said "If Labour want to try to make political capital out of the terrible events of Friday, then they can do so alone and the voters can judge them for it."
And you would be wrong once again.
Your forensic analysis of the issues sets new standards daily.
Well you are wrong - it is that simple. Labour introduced a policy that let dangerous criminals out automatically after serving half of their time. That is a fact. Spout all the shite you want it is really that simple. But for that Policy this horrendous event would not have happened.
You can almost smell the pant wetting terror that this could in any way be linked to the Govt that has been in power for the last nine years.
The Govt has had ample opportunity to review the procedures for de radicalisation of terror related prisoners and how to monitor and handle them upon release because at some point they were going to be released. Taking responsibility would be a more adult response rather than Johnson riding on the back of the dead for political gain.
Banging your head against a wall of ignorance mate.I'm not having anything both ways. I understand the need for cuts. End of.
When you also understand the need for financial prudence, you might have a chance of getting a majority in a general election. Let that sink in for 2 minutes.
a) It was the right thing to do, or tens of millions of people would have lost their life's savings and their pensions.
b) Doing it was hardly without consequences, was it. It plunged us into enormous debt and fucked the country up for the next 10 years. You may have noticed?
And your side's suggestion is that we fuck up the country for the next 10 years by doing exactly the same thing, only more so? Genius, absolute genius.
The bung to the DUP was distasteful I agree, but entirely necessary to keep Jeremy Cretin out of No.10. An objective which justifies any and all actions, I might add. And in the scheme of things the amount was small. So far only a few hundred million has been paid.
Compare that to the £58 *billion* Labour is waving around to bribe the WASPI voters. Completely un-costed, thrown in on a whim.
Fucking cheek is a speciality of yours it seems.
So they have been in power for ten years, yet it's Labours fault? How does that even make sense?Well you are wrong - it is that simple. Labour introduced a policy that let dangerous criminals out automatically after serving half of their time. That is a fact. Spout all the shite you want it is really that simple. But for that Policy this horrendous event would not have happened.
No, it doesn't. However, Labour (Yvette Cooper) started it.
IMO, it would have been better if the Tories had simply risen above it and said "If Labour want to try to make political capital out of the terrible events of Friday, then they can do so alone and the voters can judge them for it."
So they have been in power for ten years, yet it's Labours fault? How does that even make sense?
I’m going with no as the answer to the above.
There was no reference to reviewing sentencing guidelines or implementing better monitoring measures etc in the recent Queen’s Speech that Johnson deemed so necessary either. Can’t imagine why he was suddenly all over the attack. Maybe there is an election on.