Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35407052)

I'd have thought the anti Iraq and Afghanistan war stance would have gone down rather well with the Muslim segment of the electorate.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35407093)

I don't think Ed will make it to the next election.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35407098)

Whatever you think of Gorgeous George (and that's not an awful lot, in my case), our political landscape is in dire need of mavericks and people who think differently to the crowd. Westminster will be a better place with him back in it.

Originally Posted by Taf (Post 35407085)

I reckon that's all that got him elected.

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35407098)

Whatever you think of Gorgeous George (and that's not an awful lot, in my case), our political landscape is in dire need of mavericks and people who think differently to the crowd. Westminster will be a better place with him back in it.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35407029)

Shame he doesn't do this job however. Deciding that Big Brother was more important than the vote on Crossrail, which is going though what was then his constituency. He is interested in his own ego and publicity, it wasn't the only time he prioritised media commitments over parliamentary commitments (i.e actual voting). His defence was in to invoke Tony Blair's record of attending less than he did whilst refusing to take into account that Blair was the Prime Minster.




Bradford have elected someone who will do squat for them. A professional contrarian whose 'beliefs' seems to revolve around a naive and simplistic notion that the West is always at fault. The Falklands belong to Argentina, not because of any rational and logical argument, but because of 'British Imperialism' and he will continue to rail against such Imperialism with great oratory to the delight of his fans but refuse to engage in any substance. That is on what he has based a career in politics in.

Still, at least the people of Bradford West get to see their name on a byline during one of his many forthcoming interviews in lieu of seeing it in a a parliamentary voting record.

The only good that can come of this is more pressure on Ed Miliband to step aside and get someone in who knows what they are doing.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35407231)

I heard him say catagorically that his expenses were zero pounds so some one's telling lies, given the number of time he's been to court and proven libled I'll go with him especially as his name would have been top of the pile during the expenses scandle.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35407231)

I heard him say catagorically that his expenses were zero pounds so some one's telling lies, given the number of time he's been to court and proven libled I'll go with him especially as his name would have been top of the pile during the expenses scandle.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35407231)

I heard him say catagorically that his expenses were zero pounds.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35407275)

They Work For You - George Galloway

Expenses are at the bottom of the webpage - according to this, he claimed

2008-09 £130,340
2007-08 £136,390
2006-07 £107,610
2005-06 £107,030
2004-05 £145,072
2003-04 £105,973
2002-03 £126,759
2001-02 £84,773

That totals up to approx. £940,000, which is a bit more than "zero pounds"....

And in the "Members Interests" section, it shows he earns approx 200k per annum on his speaking and media engagements.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/regmem/?p=10218

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35407288)

That's interesting wonder why he told such a blatantly provable lie on tv IIRC he was laying into some MP about duck ponds and he responded with something like I can't wait to see your expenses, that's when he said they were zero pounds.

Perhaps I being thick again

My expenses are zero. I have no second home, I have never bought a bean from the "John Lewis List", which I didn't know existed and I don't claim a penny in travel expenses.

http://blogs.dailyrecord.co.uk/cgi-b...cludeBlogs=162