Jump to content

The Politics Thread 2019


Day

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 12.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, McRamFan said:

More trouble ahead:

Gavin Williamson sacking: Former defence secretary denies Huawei leak.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48129280

To quote the article 'He was sacked as defence secretary for allegedly disclosing plans to allow Chinese telecoms giant Huawei to help build the UK's 5G network.'

Sorry I cannot see that this needs to be secret, this is of National interest, especially with the poo storm happening between the USA and Huawei, (aka USA v China, Apple v Huawei).

I expect that Williamson was set up.

It's certainly got a feel of a stitch up about it.

Isn't it a crime to reveal any details from the National Security Council to the press? If so why is the government not allowing the police to investigate the incident. Especially as it is claimed that there is undeniable proof of who did it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

Make's you wonder what Grayling has on May.  Another £50m of public money to a ferry company.  How nurses could you employ with that 2000ish?

Wouldn't surprise me to see the word "grayling" make it into the OED as a descriptor for a monumental rooster-up, perpetrated by individuals of imited intelligence, teflon skin and a total absence of self-awareness.

? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

It's certainly got a feel of a stitch up about it.

Isn't it a crime to reveal any details from the National Security Council to the press? If so why is the government not allowing the police to investigate the incident. Especially as it is claimed that there is undeniable proof of who did it. 

 

Yes it is, they are covering something up, probably Graylings errors.  The crooks own the Police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

28 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Isn't it a crime to reveal any details from the National Security Council to the press? If so why is the government not allowing the police to investigate the incident. Especially as it is claimed that there is undeniable proof of who did it. 

 

Yes. They'll all have signed the official secrets act, so it is weird that the Govt wants to draw a line under it, rather than have it properly investigated.

Based on what I've read about the guy this morning, he's very ambitious and likes the politics game - which makes it strange that he'd then go and do something this stupid and guaranteed to torpedo his career.

Maybe he's just a highly principled public servant, who is willing to sacrifice himself for the good of the nation. Haha no, really. Stop laughing....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, McRamFan said:

Yes it is, they are covering something up, probably Graylings errors.  The crooks own the Police.

Thought the Masons own the police. Thats the ones with the dodgy hand shake, not the ones who will be helping to rebuild the Notre Dame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, McRamFan said:

Make's you wonder what Grayling has on May.  Another £50m of public money to a ferry company.  How nurses could you employ with that 2000ish?

With nurses salaries and on-costs (which, given NHS pensions are pretty vast) you could maybe employ around 1,250 nurses for £50m.

That is, of course - just for ONE single year.

And given that Sheffield Teaching Hospitals alone currently employs 17,500 members of staff, it ain't gonna get you very far.

When it comes to the public coffers, £50m isn't actually a huge figure. Referencing Sheffield Teaching Hospitals again, their annual budget is circa £1.5 billion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TibshelfRam said:

With nurses salaries and on-costs (which, given NHS pensions are pretty vast) you could maybe employ around 1,250 nurses for £50m.

That is, of course - just for ONE single year.

And given that Sheffield Teaching Hospitals alone currently employs 17,500 members of staff, it ain't gonna get you very far.

When it comes to the public coffers, £50m isn't actually a huge figure. Referencing Sheffield Teaching Hospitals again, their annual budget is circa £1.5 billion.

So, because the STH needs £1.5b, it's OK for Grayling to squander the odd £50m...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, McRamFan said:

So, because the STH needs £1.5b, it's OK for Grayling to squander the odd £50m...

Yes, that's exactly what he meant?

It's also about 0.005% of the £10bn wasted on the failed NHS IT project. How many ministers were fired for that?. Clue: It's less than 1.

Quite apart from the question of whether one of the companies had access to ships, Brexit planning is expensive and the longer it drags on, the more it's costing - not just for Govt but for all of us small businesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, HantsRam said:

Wouldn't surprise me to see the word "grayling" make it into the OED as a descriptor for a monumental rooster-up, perpetrated by individuals of imited intelligence, teflon skin and a total absence of self-awareness.

?

A grayling is a freshwater fish that, it is alleged, smells of thyme.

It is also a politician who, it is alleged, stinks all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 1of4 said:

Thought the Masons own the police. Thats the ones with the dodgy hand shake, not the ones who will be helping to rebuild the Notre Dame.

... or the two playing for Derby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TibshelfRam said:

With nurses salaries and on-costs (which, given NHS pensions are pretty vast) you could maybe employ around 1,250 nurses for £50m.

That is, of course - just for ONE single year.

And given that Sheffield Teaching Hospitals alone currently employs 17,500 members of staff, it ain't gonna get you very far.

When it comes to the public coffers, £50m isn't actually a huge figure. Referencing Sheffield Teaching Hospitals again, their annual budget is circa £1.5 billion.

Or one day's contributions (less discount) to the EU. 

£50m is a piddling amount in the grand scheme. But its £50m lost without anything in return, and lost due to a bad decision. Inexcusable because of that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/04/2019 at 18:08, Archied said:

Ok time to throw your hats in the ring before the event ,,,, if the brexit party blow others out of the water in the euro elections will you take it as a pointer that the country has not swayed to remain since the referendum as claimed by remainers or will it mean nothing ? In which case the same importance applied if a pro remain party comes out on top , be good to put it out ther before any result so no after the event spin will cut it

If the only party that is actively advocating a second referendum saw a 118% increase in the number of councils won in the local elections would that serve as an indicator that many are not just taking the view that Brexit means Brexit, that many are not feeling betrayed by the suggestion of being given the chance to restate their opinion now that more is know? Would that send a signal in any way? Coz that's what just happened to the Lib Dems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

If the only party that is actively advocating a second referendum saw a 118% increase in the number of councils won in the local elections would that serve as an indicator that many are not just taking the view that Brexit means Brexit, that many are not feeling betrayed by the suggestion of being given the chance to restate their opinion now that more is know? Would that send a signal in any way? Coz that's what just happened to the Lib Dems.

Difficult to say without all the facts, the Guardian was reporting low voter turnout affecting the Tories so maybe the Lib Dems are winning by default as angry Tory voters can't quite bring themselves to vote for UKIP/Brexit Party and just stayed away. 

The whole thing is a mess and local elections on ever muddy the waters, it wouldn't be the first time the Lib Dems have been given false hope by them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Difficult to say without all the facts, the Guardian was reporting low voter turnout affecting the Tories so maybe the Lib Dems are winning by default as angry Tory voters can't quite bring themselves to vote for UKIP/Brexit Party and just stayed away. 

The whole thing is a mess and local elections on ever muddy the waters, it wouldn't be the first time the Lib Dems have been given false hope by them!

I agree, doubt there's much you can read from the local elections other than general dissatisfaction. Labour won Tory seats, Tory won Labour seats. Seems a vote against the status quo was the main read from it, but that's no surprise considering the complete mess that we're in. I doubt anyone will disagree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, maxjam said:

The whole thing is a mess and local elections on ever muddy the waters,

Derby as ever the contrarian! Last year when Brexit seemed under control UKIP was wiped out in the local elections (as they no longer had a purpose) but somehow Derby was the only place were UKIP made gains!

This year the Tories have had heavy losses nationally (as a protest against their botching of Brexit) - yet in Derby they have gained seats..

It's actually quite heartening that people in Derby actually do care about the city and vote accordingly - rather than just using local elections as a way to send a message to Westminster

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...