Do you want to discuss boring politics? (45 Viewers)

[skybluetony176]

The party of law and order. Unless it’s one of them.

Five Tory MPs breached code of conduct by trying to influence judge in Charlie Elphicke sex assault trial, committee rules

Charlie Elphicke was suspended from the Conservatives in 2017 after he was accused of sexual offences against two members of staff, and later sentenced to two years in prison.

news.sky.com

Still the party of law and order

 

---

[skybluetony176]

The party of law and order. Unless they can use it to stoke a culture war.

 

[shmmeee]

Party of law and order unhappy law is being applied. Classic Boris

 

[David O'Day]

The party of law and order. Unless they can use it to stoke a culture war.

this the labour party led by a former dps?

 

[wingy]

By definition that must mean Judges and Juries too?

 

[Evo1883]

Best thing she's ever said

 

[wingy]

Best thing she's ever said

If that is accurate its appalling and sheer hypocrisy.

 

[Evo1883]

If that is accurate its appalling and sheer hypocrisy.

Don't look much further than our own council for the hypocrisy .
They are exactly the same

 

[Grendel]

If that is accurate its appalling and sheer hypocrisy.

She has blocked public comments on it. She’s a deranged lunatic so I doubt anyone takes seriously anything she says

 

[Ian1779]

She has blocked public comments on it. She’s a deranged lunatic so I doubt anyone takes seriously anything she says

She is right though. They are making a load of staff redundant as they’re broke, and employing replacements on insecure, short term contracts.

 

[Ian1779]

Labour recruiting staff on insecure contracts while making mass redundancies

 

[Grendel]

She is right though. They are making a load of staff redundant as they’re broke, and employing replacements on insecure, short term contracts.

And I’m sure if her former camper van shag did this she’d have been as vehement

 

[SBAndy]

And I’m sure if her former camper van shag did this she’d have been as vehement

But he didn’t, so I guess it doesn’t matter a jot.

 

[Ian1779]

And I’m sure if her former camper van shag did this she’d have been as vehement

She probably would to be fair… not every Labour politician is vacuous and morally bankrupt, even if you do hate her politics.

 

[skybluetony176]

 

[stupot07]

CON +5

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

Cost of Britain’s ‘national flagship’ jumps by up to £100m in a week

Price tag on so-called trade yacht aimed at promoting UK business soars even before contract to build it is awarded

www.ft.com

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[skybluetony176]

CON +5

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Umbrella +1

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The spin on the jobs at Labour hq is not true

 

[shmmeee]

The spin on the jobs at Labour hq is not true

Neither is the crap about “an exodus of members” membership numbers are about what they were before the leadership contest and always blip up during a contest.

So much dishonest crap written about the party by salty people right now. I read a Novara article (not something I often do but thought id give them a shot) in the first paragraph I spotted three outright lies.

With friends like these who needs enemies? The left can’t whine about “saboteurs” or “red Tories” any more. They’re as bad or worse than the right were under Corbyn. It’s pathetic. Especially as Starmer isn’t even on the right. He’s soft left like Milliband was. If they kneecap him they’re just going to end up with someone actually on the right. So self destructive and stupid.

 

[Ian1779]

The spin on the jobs at Labour hq is not true

Which bit isn’t true?

 

[shmmeee]

Which bit isn’t true?

Read the article you posted. They aren’t the same job and they aren’t agency workers. It’s not fire and rehire.

they’re hiring temporary workers to clear the backlog of complaints. The article spin on a basic WFH temporary contract is hilarious. “They ask people to have their own Wi-Fi “

 

[Ian1779]

Read the article you posted. They aren’t the same job and they aren’t agency workers. It’s not fire and rehire.

they’re hiring temporary workers to clear the backlog of complaints. The article spin on a basic WFH temporary contract is hilarious. “They ask people to have their own Wi-Fi “

So they are hiring temporary workers to do the jobs of those they are making redundant.

 

[David O'Day]

So they are hiring temporary workers to do the jobs of those they are making redundant.

no they are not

 

[Ian1779]

no they are not

So if they are thinking about making redundancies (which they are) then why not re-deploy existing staff to do the jobs of the temporary staff, if there is such a need to deal with a backlog of complaints?

 

[David O'Day]

So if they are thinking about making redundancies (which they are) then why not re-deploy existing staff to do the jobs of the temporary staff, if there is such a need to deal with a backlog of complaints?

Because that is what shitty companies do. Instead of giving you a fair pay out they offer you a temp role in a departent you don't want to work in. Turn it down and you get nothing.

So no the article is not true at all.

 

[shmmeee]

So they are hiring temporary workers to do the jobs of those they are making redundant.

You think a third of Labour’s staff work in complaints? Really?

 

[Ian1779]

You think a third of Labour’s staff work in complaints? Really?

Not what I said at all - but feel free to spin what I said in your usual defence of Starmer. So everything is fine, and any issues or problems are because of the ‘salty left’

You should do these TEDtalks more often.

 

[shmmeee]

Not what I said at all - but feel free to spin what I said in your usual defence of Starmer. So everything is fine, and any issues or problems are because of the ‘salty left’

You should do these TEDtalks more often.

Sorry you can’t back up your weird hatred of the only left wing party in this country.

You said it was fire and rehire. A third of staff are being asked to take VR, the new hires are a temporary increase in capacity in the complaints department. That’s not fire and rehire. Fire and rehire is firing someone (no one is being fired) then rehiring someone to do that job (that’s not happening and couldn’t legally as they’re being made redundant and you can’t hire someone in a position you made redundant for a period of time).

It’s yet another pathetic attack on Starmer based in fantasy from people who have been crying they fucked up their chance with the party and someone else is getting a go.

It was pathetic when the right did it. It’s pathetic when the left do it.

 

[shmmeee]

By the way, speaking of saltiness @Brighton Sky Blue how you feeling about Biden?

Seems the Bernie stans in the states are admitting they were wrong.

Joe Biden is proving progressives wrong. And they're loving it.

"Biden has been incredibly responsive to the progressive movement," said Rep. Jamaal Bowman, a first-term Democrat from the New York City area.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Ian1779]

Sorry you can’t back up your weird hatred of the only left wing party in this country.

You said it was fire and rehire. A third of staff are being asked to take VR, the new hires are a temporary increase in capacity in the complaints department. That’s not fire and rehire. Fire and rehire is firing someone (no one is being fired) then rehiring someone to do that job (that’s not happening and couldn’t legally as they’re being made redundant and you can’t hire someone in a position you made redundant for a period of time).

It’s yet another pathetic attack on Starmer based in fantasy from people who have been crying they fucked up their chance with the party and someone else is getting a go.

It was pathetic when the right did it. It’s pathetic when the left do it.

Not quite sure where you get this idea of hatred from, I’m a paid up member just like you.

But equally, as a member I don’t think it’s beyond unreasonable to want to know why a political party that 3 years ago was loaded is now in the shit financially and having to make redundancies of any sort? And seeing as the party refuse to produce any kind of reasonable response other than ‘it’s that pesky Corbyn’s fault’ the only information seem to be from crank left news organisations like the Independent.
It’s actually again the people working for/advising Starmer (in this case Evans) that are doing a Sterling job of making his party look like muppets.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Not quite sure where you get this idea of hatred from, I’m a paid up member just like you.

But equally, as a member I don’t think it’s beyond unreasonable to want to know why a political party that 3 years ago was loaded is now in the shit financially and having to make redundancies of any sort? And seeing as the party refuse to produce any kind of reasonable response other than ‘it’s that pesky Corbyn’s fault’ the only information seem to be from crank left news organisations like the Independent.
It’s actually again the people working for/advising Starmer (in this case Evans) that are doing a Sterling job of making his party look like muppets.

The story is made to make Labour look bad by twisting the story to make it look like they are firing some people and hiring others. Tories doing the same would be a company managing their finances well in desperate Financial Times!

 

[shmmeee]

Not quite sure where you get this idea of hatred from, I’m a paid up member just like you.

But equally, as a member I don’t think it’s beyond unreasonable to want to know why a political party that 3 years ago was loaded is now in the shit financially and having to make redundancies of any sort? And seeing as the party refuse to produce any kind of reasonable response other than ‘it’s that pesky Corbyn’s fault’ the only information seem to be from crank left news organisations like the Independent.
It’s actually again the people working for/advising Starmer (in this case Evans) that are doing a Sterling job of making his party look like muppets.

Several things seem to have happened. Corbyn massively expanded the staff with lots of community organisers, unions have pulled funding since Starmer came in, and we’re years from an election so donors aren’t spending their money on a potential government.

We were £25m in debt after Blair, cleared that under Corbyn, then went back into the red again at the start of 2019.

Being in opposition just isn’t lucrative. Most funding comes from donors and they all fucked off when it was clear we were nowhere near government and couldn’t stop Brexit.

 

[Grendel]

Is this true or not then?

Redirect Notice

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Is this true or not then?

Redirect Notice

The true bits are true the assumptions are assumptions and the perceptions are perceptions