Keir Starmer

What, 9 years after the event? Literally after the event.
Hate to break it to you Vic but the Covent Garden penthouse and it's owner are in the news right now.
How far back are you going with this bollocks , it is getting fucking annoying . Can you tories talk about policy and what you would do differently instead of this childish crap
Sure. Some of us were mentioning stuff like this for 2/3 years .... with no response.
Every now and again the adults would pop in the room to tell us to stop being childish ...

 
How far back are you going with this bollocks , it is getting fucking annoying . Can you tories talk about policy and what you would do differently instead of this childish crap

Did this rule apply when the Tories were in charge?
 
Of course it can be, the alternative is just giving everyone a benefit even if they don’t need it. They will end up being forced to address the areas they didn’t when they implemented it - as I said with the caveat that as long as they realise they have to change the narrative and see it as a net loser eventually.

You seem to think I was saying in its exact current guise. I didn’t say that at any point.

So it could be good policy if they change it and implement something else, got it.
 
Thinking about it that was a shrewd move by Rosie Duffield. After serial loon Bridgen lost his seat she has eyed the vacancy for "mad MP who makes speeches to a vacant house every Friday riding hobby horse whilst other MP's are back at constituency offices preparing for surgery" and has grasped it with both hands - good prep for baying at the full moon when you lose as Bridgen does now ........... Former work colleague and Union Rep who lives in Canterbury says she is all over the news there ( 15mins of fame) but the local betting is she will be wooed by Reform Ltd by Christmas
 
So it could be good policy if they change it and implement something else, got it.

I didn’t say that either. I’d have been happy as it as a first step had they given it six months to implement, given plenty of pensioners in the absolute lower levels of poverty will be much better off by getting pension credit as well as the WFA. I’d have then liked to have seen them tweak the limits on pension credit, given that’s the gateway to more benefits than just WFA too.

The WFA not being blanket-applied to everyone, particularly given there’s 40% of pensioners in the top half of income of the whole population, and it being linked to pension credit is a good policy if they’d sorted out everything else first.

Hence why in my very first post I said it could end up a good policy if they change their reasoning (I.e don’t see it as a potential saving and instead see it as a fairer way to implement a benefits policy ensuring more gets to the people that need it, which then leads to increasing the limits for those eligible for PC) and also said they’d implemented it shockingly.
 
With Rayner, Reeves and Cooper in three of the top five jobs, it sounds like bollocks from a bitter backbencher who lost her job on the opposition front bench a couple of years ago.
Yeah. she sure came across as insincere and just posturing in her interview?????!?!!!

OBVIOUSLY, she is seriously upset with Starmer proving to be a ****. I mean seriously how desperate are you lot to pretend everything is going swimmingly? It's a fucking car crash and every neutral can see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
With Rayner, Reeves and Cooper in three of the top five jobs, it sounds like bollocks from a bitter backbencher who lost her job on the opposition front bench a couple of years ago.
I thought that was a strange accusation to make re the women. Particularly with Rayner so prominent.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.