The Conservative Party

Ifwecouldjust....... said:
Forward planning is not in the Conservative mindset (unless its for hurting someone / thing )
Click to expand...
It's not forward planning, if a committee member adds something to the agenda there is a legal obligation to consider it. For the chair to say otherwise prior to the meeting anything different would be undemocratic.
 
ganganvince said:
Considering is not on the brink as a former (independent) councillor we had to consider many non starters purely because they were on the agenda to not say prior to meeting they were being considered would go against council rules.
Click to expand...

So, we agree that the source of the media report was the leader of the council.

And protestors had nothing to do with it. Nor was it ‘MSM scaremongering’.

Glad we cleared that one up.
 
BobKowalski said:
So, we agree that the source of the media report was the leader of the council.

And protestors had nothing to do with it. Nor was it ‘MSM scaremongering’.

Glad we cleared that one up.
Click to expand...
We agree the source was the council leader answering a question in the only way he could, but not that it wasn't scaremongering the headline was not factual and we can't say whether the protesters impacted the discussion without further info as we have no idea how many tankers were stuck.
 
ganganvince said:
We agree the source was the council leader answering a question in the only way he could, but not that it wasn't scaremongering the headline was not factual and we can't say whether the protesters impacted the discussion without further info as we have no idea how many tankers were stuck.
Click to expand...

To be honest, we could have saved a lot of time if you had simply found out the source of the quote/story to begin with, rather than trying to shoehorn your agenda about the ‘MSM’ - a term used by people invariably living down a rabbit hole of misinformation - and your dislike of protestors.

Now, you are doubling down on wording used and a refusal to drop the protestor angle. Personally, I would have thought an authority using emergency
powers to ensure fuel supplies would calm the situation rather than inflame, but maybe that’s just me.

I’d drop the protestor angle. I doubt some protests on the M25 would have fuel supplies in all of Surrey grinding to a halt. As a frequent user of the M25, and account holder with the Dartford crossing, I can confidently state that if the M25 being blocked ground all fuel deliveries in Surrey to a halt, then the residents of Surrey would be living in permanent wilderness.
 
BobKowalski said:
To be honest, we could have saved a lot of time if you had simply found out the source of the quote/story to begin with, rather than trying to shoehorn your agenda about the ‘MSM’ - a term used by people invariably living down a rabbit hole of misinformation - and your dislike of protestors.

Now, you are doubling down on wording used and a refusal to drop the protestor angle. Personally, I would have thought an authority using emergency
powers to ensure fuel supplies would calm the situation rather than inflame, but maybe that’s just me.

I’d drop the protestor angle. I doubt some protests on the M25 would have fuel supplies in all of Surrey grinding to a halt. As a frequent user of the M25, and account holder with the Dartford crossing, I can confidently state that if the M25 being blocked ground all fuel deliveries in Surrey to a halt, then the residents of Surrey would be living in permanent wilderness.
Click to expand...
Your original post just said Surrey on the brink it did not say why whether it was tanker drivers or protesters . Turns out that was bollox and just a Councillor giving the only answer he legally could when asked if being considered. Surrey was never on the brink of declaring a major incident as claimed by your good self.

BobKowalski said:
‘Surrey on brink of declaring a major incident tonight. Key workers would be prioritised for fuel on the forecourt and electric vehicles brought in to help social, care and emergency workers move around the county.’ @Sky
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ganganvince said:
Your original post just said Surrey on the brink it did not say why whether it was tanker drivers or protesters . Turns out that was bollox and just a Councillor giving the only answer he legally could when asked if being considered. Surrey was never on the brink.
Click to expand...

It was a newsflash from Sky at the height of the petrol hoohah, talking about getting fuel to the forecourts, and based on a briefing from the leader of Surrey Council.

I get you are determined to take issue with it, so can I suggest you contact Sky, and/or the leader of Surrey Council, and take it up with them?
 
BobKowalski said:
It was a newsflash from Sky at the height of the petrol hoohah, talking about getting fuel to the forecourts, and based on a briefing from the leader of Surrey Council.

I get you are determined to take issue with it, so can I suggest you contact Sky, and/or the leader of Surrey Council, and take it up with them?
Click to expand...
Just for info Tim Oliver denies the quote so as we stand. It was not a briefing, it wasn't Tim and its not happening which make it irresponsible reporting.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
carlosthejackal said:
Amazing how quickly you adjust to empty shelves in supermarkets, petrol stations with no fuel , cafes and restaurants on reduced hours because of staffing issues , care homes understaffed , NHS waiting lists growing by the day, the uplands don’t seem sunlit .
Click to expand...


Leavers will put up with anything as long as the forriners are gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top