Cable Forum
Page 27 of 28 « First 1723242526 27 28
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Starmer’s chronicles (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33712992)

1andrew1 18-02-2026 18:16
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
What's that coming over the Hill? Is it a U-turn? ;)
Quote:
The chancellor has been speaking to broadcasters this morning - and didn't rule out a potential 16th U-turn from the government coming down the tracks.

This centres on the promise from Labour to bring up the minimum wage for 18 to 20 year-olds in line with the rest of the workforce.

However, there are reports this could be delayed or scrapped due to the impact it is having on youth unemployment.

Asked if the government is sticking to its manifesto plans on youth wages, Rachel Reeves dodges answering.
https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...enoch-12593360

To me, if an increase in minimum wage is counter-productive, reacting to the evidence by not increasing it further is a sensible adjustment.

nomadking 18-02-2026 18:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36210775)
What's that coming over the Hill? Is it a U-turn? ;)

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...enoch-12593360

To me, if an increase in minimum wage is counter-productive, reacting to the evidence by not increasing it further is a sensible adjustment.
But as with so many of these u-turns, the evidence was readily apparent long before now.

papa smurf 18-02-2026 18:38
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
gosh that's come as a shock :erm:

Anonymouse 19-02-2026 14:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
As much as I agree about Starmer, he is at last talking some sense. In particular, that no-one is above the law.

In this country, that includes His Majesty (well, at least partly, and in principle, as I discovered to my surprise when it occurred to me to check), and so it should.

This only confirms that Reform must not get in - even if we end up with the damn Tories again. I'm inclined to employ my 'vote against' policy and vote for any party but Reform (and there's still no sign of None Of The Above, is there?).

Ladies especially: do you want this Nazi, a.k.a. Farage, telling you to go back to the kitchen and stay there? To provide a husband's "marital rights" - a.k.a. his right to screw, i.e. rape, his wife, whether she wants it or not (yes, kids, there was a time when a wife could not charge her husband with rape or even assault)? Do you want a return to the days as depicted in Remembrance Of The Daleks, where Ace had to take down a sign saying 'No Coloureds'?

Well, do you?!

Sephiroth 19-02-2026 14:51
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymouse (Post 36210828)
As much as I agree about Starmer, he is at last talking some sense. In particular, that no-one is above the law.

In this country, that includes His Majesty, and so it should.

This only confirms that Reform must not get in - even if we end up with the damn Tories again. I'm inclined to employ my 'vote against' policy and vote for any party but Reform (and there's still no sign of None Of The Above, is there?).

Ladies especially: do you want this Nazi, a.k.a. Farage, telling you to go back to the kitchen and stay there? To provide a husband's "marital rights" - a.k.a. his right to screw, i.e. rape, his wife, whether she wants it or not (yes, kids, there was a time when a wife could not charge her husband with rape or even assault)? Do you want a return to the days as depicted in Remembrance Of The Daleks, where Ace had to take down a sign saying 'No Coloureds'?

Well, do you?!
You've taken leave of your senses.

Anonymouse 20-02-2026 06:44
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Uh, no, I don't think I have (though I admit after my stroke anything goes!). That is what Farage is implying. Starmer, at least, realises this.

1andrew1 20-02-2026 08:42
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Two bits of good news for the government in figures for January 2026 which exceeded predictions.
  • January saw the biggest budget surplus since records began in 1993. The government received £30.4bn more money than it spent.
  • Retail sales saw a far better than expected January, increasing by 1.8% . It was the largest increase since May 2024.This data gave "further evidence that economic growth picked up smartly in the New Year as budget uncertainty fades", Pantheon's chief UK economist Rob Wood said.
https://news.sky.com/story/record-br...rises-13509835

papa smurf 20-02-2026 08:47
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36210920)
Two bits of good news for the government in figures for January 2026 which exceeded predictions.
  • January saw the biggest budget surplus since records began in 1993. The government received £30.4bn more money than it spent.
  • Retail sales saw a far better than expected January, increasing by 1.8% . It was the largest increase since May 2024.This data gave "further evidence that economic growth picked up smartly in the New Year as budget uncertainty fades", Pantheon's chief UK economist Rob Wood said.
https://news.sky.com/story/record-br...rises-13509835


That's what happens when you over tax the public and business

1andrew1 20-02-2026 08:51
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36210921)
That's what happens when you over tax the public and business
Or when/as well as you have lots of successful self-employed people doing their tax returns. It could be a lucky blip.

Sephiroth 20-02-2026 10:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36210920)
Two bits of good news for the government in figures for January 2026 which exceeded predictions.
  • January saw the biggest budget surplus since records began in 1993. The government received £30.4bn more money than it spent.
  • Retail sales saw a far better than expected January, increasing by 1.8% . It was the largest increase since May 2024.This data gave "further evidence that economic growth picked up smartly in the New Year as budget uncertainty fades", Pantheon's chief UK economist Rob Wood said.
https://news.sky.com/story/record-br...rises-13509835
As mentioned already, self-assessment receipts. It’s only good news if they are higher than last year.

On retail sales - was that number for the Chrimbo period?

There’s nothing good news for the government. Their policies are causing joblessness.

Carth 20-02-2026 10:24
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Yes, but clutching at straws has become the National Pastime :D

nomadking 20-02-2026 10:53
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
As the graph in this article shows, a surplus is a feature of every January.

Hugh 20-02-2026 11:13
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36210935)
As mentioned already, self-assessment receipts. It’s only good news if they are higher than last year.

On retail sales - was that number for the Chrimbo period?

There’s nothing good news for the government. Their policies are causing joblessness.
From the linked Sky article

Quote:
Self-assessed tax revenues were nearly £6bn more than planned for and capital gains tax receipts surged.
Also

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gover...es/january2026

Quote:
This month saw the highest January combined self-assessed income and capital gains tax receipts on record (not adjusted for inflation).
Quote:
On retail sales - was that number for the Chrimbo period?
Not unless "the Chrimbo period" was in January or the New Year…

From the quote (and the linked Sky article)

Quote:
Retail sales saw a far better than expected January, increasing by 1.8% . It was the largest increase since May 2024.This data gave "further evidence that economic growth picked up smartly in the New Year as budget uncertainty fades", Pantheon's chief UK economist Rob Wood said.

---------- Post added at 12:00 ---------- Previous post was at 11:59 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36210940)
As the graph in this article shows, a surplus is a feature of every January.

Also from that link

Quote:
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said it was the highest surplus in any month since records began in 1993, without adjusting for inflation, and nearly double last January's £15.4bn surplus.

---------- Post added at 12:13 ---------- Previous post was at 12:00 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36210935)
As mentioned already, self-assessment receipts. It’s only good news if they are higher than last year.

On retail sales - was that number for the Chrimbo period?

There’s nothing good news for the government. Their policies are causing joblessness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36210936)
Yes, but clutching at straws has become the National Pastime :D
https://media1.tenor.com/m/VaIiRqouG...d/nods-yes.gif

papa smurf 20-02-2026 11:18
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
did we have the January sales this January

Mr K 20-02-2026 11:29
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Well done Rachel. I'm sure we can all congratulate her on a job well done ;)

Carth 20-02-2026 17:52
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36210951)
Well done Rachel. I'm sure we can all congratulate her on a job well done ;)
I'll drink to that . . . well I would if there was a decent local pub that wasn't now pretending to be a high class restaurant :D

Mr K 20-02-2026 18:44
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36210981)
I'll drink to that . . . well I would if there was a decent local pub that wasn't now pretending to be a high class restaurant :D
Drink at home for £1 a pint, or £6 in a pub with some bores telling you ' what they reckon', your choice ;)

Carth 20-02-2026 20:00
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
The internet is full of bores telling you what they reckon*, I'd be off to the pub like a shot to get out of the way of her and the bloody TV :D



*yes yes I'm one

Chris 21-02-2026 07:27
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymouse (Post 36210877)
Uh, no, I don't think I have (though I admit after my stroke anything goes!). That is what Farage is implying. Starmer, at least, realises this.
Maybe, maybe not. But your cultural reference points are … niche. Even for here. :D

Chris 27-02-2026 06:36
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
1 Attachment(s)
May have to revert this thread’s title to ‘Sir Keir’s Kerfuffle’. :D

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1772177691

Chris Mason of the Beeb was opining last night that for Labour to be beaten by Reform would be a headache. For them to be beaten by the Greens would be a bigger headache. In the event they were beaten by both.

Hugh 27-02-2026 07:09
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Here’s Matt Goodwin’s reaction to the result…

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2026/02/6.gif

Sephiroth 27-02-2026 08:29
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Is that right?

Quote:
Mr Goodwin also addressed the results on X. He wrote: "We are losing our country. A dangerous Muslim sectarianism has emerged.

"We have only one general election left to save Britain. Vote Reform every chance you get.

"I will continue the fight. I will always fight for you. I will stand at the next general election."

Asked earlier at the count if the result showed that Reform's progress was 'faltering', Mr Goodwin said: "We have more than doubled our vote in Labour's backyard. I think we've embarrassed Labour in one of their strongest seats. I think if we can do this here, we can do this pretty much anywhere.

"Lucy Powell said Reform finishing ahead of Labour in Greater Manchester would be existential for the Labour Party. What you're seeing today is the rise of the new politics.

"On one side is Green. They want to legalise heroin and crack cocaine and have open borders. On the other side is Reform. We want to control the borders, invest in our own people and prioritise the British hard-working majority.

"This is the future of British politics. British people are going to wake up tomorrow and think we have a choice. Do we want to go with mad Zack and the Greens or do we want to go with Nigel Farage and a Reform government?

"Every Labour MP will wake up tomorrow, look at the Reform vote and think 'Oh gosh, we are in trouble'. We have planted a flag in northern England."
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...arage-33499496

Damien 27-02-2026 09:32
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Reform lost by quite a bit. Not really sure he has much of a leg to stand on here.

Hugh 27-02-2026 09:33
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Just to confirm, is he saying a "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted in a white woman from a Party led by a Jewish man?

Or is he just being a sore loser?

Sephiroth 27-02-2026 09:41
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211359)
Just to confirm, is he saying a "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted in a white woman from a Party led by a Jewish man?

Or is he just being a sore loser?
The former.

Hugh 27-02-2026 09:43
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
If you believe that obvious fallacy, it explains why you are keen on Reform…

denphone 27-02-2026 09:44
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211359)
Just to confirm, is he saying a "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted in a white woman from a Party led by a Jewish man?

Or is he just being a sore loser?

Quite.

Carth 27-02-2026 09:58
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Will there now be a mass exodus of MP's to the Green Party?

nomadking 27-02-2026 10:18
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211359)
Just to confirm, is he saying a "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted in a white woman from a Party led by a Jewish man?

Or is he just being a sore loser?
Link
Quote:
Concerns were raised by Democracy Volunteers, a group of voluntary election observers who check voting processes are being followed correctly.
...
"In Gorton and Denton, we observed family voting in 68% of polling stations, affecting 12% of those voters observed."
Link
Quote:
Labour wants the authorities to look into claims of high levels of “family voting” in the Gorton and Denton by-election, with the party’s chairwoman describing the findings as “very concerning”.

Carth 27-02-2026 10:38
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
OK, I'll admit I haven't got a clue.

What's Family Voting?

Taf 27-02-2026 11:01
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36211377)
What's Family Voting?
When the head of a family or extended family decides how the whole group will vote. No if, no buts.

It can also be referred to as Tribal Voting.

denphone 27-02-2026 11:15
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taf (Post 36211379)
When the head of a family or extended family decides how the whole group will vote. No if, no buts.

It can also be referred to as Tribal Voting.
Tribal Voting has been going on since the year dot and by all races and religions during that time.

Some families vote Tory, Labour, etc,etc all their lives.

papa smurf 27-02-2026 11:27
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Starmer admits by-election defeat 'very disappointing' but says he will 'continue to fight'


that'll be good news for rival parties, as starmer's popularity plunges as he circles the drain

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...enoch-12593360

Sephiroth 27-02-2026 11:48
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211365)
If you believe that obvious fallacy, it explains why you are keen on Reform…
Why? That's exactly what happened.

nomadking 27-02-2026 12:20
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211359)
Just to confirm, is he saying a "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted in a white woman from a Party led by a Jewish man?

Or is he just being a sore loser?
And yet the "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted for a party that is for drugs, when that religion is meant to be against them.

Sephiroth 27-02-2026 13:30
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211388)
And yet the "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted for a party that is for drugs, when that religion is meant to be against them.
Shows you just what is going on. A further foothold in power. Mark my words (again), we'll all be facing east in 50 years ro so.

Carth 27-02-2026 13:38
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Well hopefully I won't be around to see it.

I'll be down below stirring a large cauldron of Sulphur and arguing with the horned boss man that it isn't my fault man created a better hell than his :D

Sephiroth 27-02-2026 14:02
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
You really need to be up top so that you can pour that cauldron on certain so-and-sos.

Sirius 27-02-2026 14:03
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211388)
And yet the "dangerous Muslim sectarianism" voted for a party that is for drugs, when that religion is meant to be against them.
It is also against murder but there are those who support that religion that seem happy to carry that out as well.

Taf 27-02-2026 14:27
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
More on Family Voting....

https://youtu.be/rkQCSTKjcEM?t=405

Hugh 27-02-2026 15:26
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taf (Post 36211397)
More on Family Voting....

https://youtu.be/rkQCSTKjcEM?t=405

Strange how none of these observers reported the alleged acts to the Polling Officers or the Police as they happened, as the practice was made illegal by the Ballot Secrecy Act 2023 to prevent people from watching family members while they were voting, seeing how they cast their ballot and sometimes telling them how to vote.

In fact, their website says they should...

https://democracyvolunteers.org/about-us/

Quote:
We maintain strict impartiality and require our observers to abide by UK and international standards, as well as the relevant local legal framework, when acting as our observers.

nomadking 27-02-2026 17:50
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211398)
Strange how none of these observers reported the alleged acts to the Polling Officers or the Police as they happened, as the practice was made illegal by the Ballot Secrecy Act 2023 to prevent people from watching family members while they were voting, seeing how they cast their ballot and sometimes telling them how to vote.

In fact, their website says they should...

https://democracyvolunteers.org/about-us/
They're not the ones breaking any laws.
If they did report it there and then, it wouldn't be a true picture of what might be going on at the other polling stations. They were there to observe, not interfere and police any goings on.

Itshim 28-02-2026 19:28
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Another minster resigns . What's the betting , Starmer knew nothing

Paul 28-02-2026 21:50
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Who ?

Hugh 01-03-2026 19:22
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211409)
They're not the ones breaking any laws.
If they did report it there and then, it wouldn't be a true picture of what might be going on at the other polling stations. They were there to observe, not interfere and police any goings on.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ction-33499275

Quote:
In response, the acting returning officer running the by-election has hit back at the claims, asking why the group issued their statement after polls closed at 10pm and not sooner. They also said staff were not told of family voting issues on-the-ground.

A spokesperson for the acting returning officer said: "Polling station staff are trained to look out for any evidence of undue influence on voters. No such issues have been reported today.

"If Democracy Volunteers were so concerned about alleged issues they could and should have raised them with us during polling hours so that immediate action could be taken. We have operated a central by-election hub which has been rapidly responding to reported issues during the day, in liaison with the police - who had a presence at every polling station - where necessary.

"It is extremely disappointing that Democracy Volunteers have waited until after polls have closed to make such claims."

nomadking 01-03-2026 20:05
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211503)
But then there wouldn't be a true reflection of what was going on in polling stations they weren't at. Instead of a figure of 12% of votes, it would've been a lot less at the stations they were at and intervened, but still 12% at the ones they weren't. That 12% would've been unknown because nobody was there to observe it. Just as with polling OBSERVERS around the World, their job is to observe, not interfere.

The controlling aspect over voting would still take place, just not necessarily in the voting booths.

Sephiroth 01-03-2026 20:14
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211505)
But then there wouldn't be a true reflection of what was going on in polling stations they weren't at. Instead of a figure of 12% of votes, it would've been a lot less at the stations they were at and intervened, but still 12% at the ones they weren't. That 12% would've been unknown because nobody was there to observe it. Just as with polling OBSERVERS around the World, their job is to observe, not interfere.

The controlling aspect over voting would still take place, just not necessarily in the voting booths.
I only understood about 12% of that!

Carth 01-03-2026 20:41
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36211506)
I only understood about 12% of that!
It's damn statistics again eh :D

Sephiroth 01-03-2026 20:52
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36211507)
It's damn statistics again eh :D
What about the other 88%?

nomadking 01-03-2026 21:13
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36211506)
I only understood about 12% of that!
If instead of only simply observing, they intervened, then from that point on any other attempts would also have been intervened. As a result the number observed would've been less than 12%.
Now consider a polling station that they weren't observing, then the figure might've been 12%. The only way of knowing that the possible figure for unobserved stations was 12%, was by not intervening and seeing what happened naturally.
General principle of you can't properly measure natural behaviour by intervening.

Hugh 02-03-2026 08:25
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211505)
But then there wouldn't be a true reflection of what was going on in polling stations they weren't at. Instead of a figure of 12% of votes, it would've been a lot less at the stations they were at and intervened, but still 12% at the ones they weren't. That 12% would've been unknown because nobody was there to observe it. Just as with polling OBSERVERS around the World, their job is to observe, not interfere.

The controlling aspect over voting would still take place, just not necessarily in the voting booths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211510)
If instead of only simply observing, they intervened, then from that point on any other attempts would also have been intervened. As a result the number observed would've been less than 12%.
Now consider a polling station that they weren't observing, then the figure might've been 12%. The only way of knowing that the possible figure for unobserved stations was 12%, was by not intervening and seeing what happened naturally.
General principle of you can't properly measure natural behaviour by intervening.

So, in summary, your proposition is by not doing something at somewhere where they were observing, they could have potentially affected something at somewhere else where they weren’t observing, thus potentially changing something that they couldn’t see or confirm was being changed, whilst having no idea if the possible figure of 12% was happening?

The general principle of you can’t properly measure natural behaviour by not being there to measure it…

btw, the Electoral Commission disagrees with your position on reporting any potential issues…

Quote:
The Electoral Commission said observers were expected to raise irregularities or incidents of potential fraud at the polls “on the spot”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...eform-watchdog

nomadking 02-03-2026 09:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211518)
So, in summary, your proposition is by not doing something at somewhere where they were observing, they could have potentially affected something at somewhere else where they weren’t observing, thus potentially changing something that they couldn’t see or confirm was being changed, whilst having no idea if the possible figure of 12% was happening?

The general principle of you can’t properly measure natural behaviour by not being there to measure it…

btw, the Electoral Commission disagrees with your position on reporting any potential issues…

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...eform-watchdog
Usual nonsense. It's about MEASURING the level of incidents if no inventions are made. Interventions would reduce the level of incidents, but the level of incidents where there was no intervention would obviously be higher. How much higher would be completely unknown because nobody is monitoring it.
If you have no interventions for shoplifting as in parts of the US, there ends up being a free-for-all. Not everybody has the desire to shoplift, but with no interventions you get an idea of how many would shoplift.

Quote:
However, John Ault, director of Democracy Volunteers, said it was “a normal international standard not to issue a comment until after voting has finished”.

Sephiroth 02-03-2026 11:15
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211526)
Usual nonsense. It's about MEASURING the level of incidents if no inventions are made. Interventions would reduce the level of incidents, but the level of incidents where there was no intervention would obviously be higher. How much higher would be completely unknown because nobody is monitoring it.
If you have no interventions for shoplifting as in parts of the US, there ends up being a free-for-all. Not everybody has the desire to shoplift, but with no interventions you get an idea of how many would shoplift.
Quite.

Anyway, now I understand your point. Thanks.

Hugh 02-03-2026 13:27
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211526)
Usual nonsense. It's about MEASURING the level of incidents if no inventions are made. Interventions would reduce the level of incidents, but the level of incidents where there was no intervention would obviously be higher. How much higher would be completely unknown because nobody is monitoring it.
If you have no interventions for shoplifting as in parts of the US, there ends up being a free-for-all. Not everybody has the desire to shoplift, but with no interventions you get an idea of how many would shoplift.

Quote:
However, John Ault, director of Democracy Volunteers, said it was “a normal international standard not to issue a comment until after voting has finished”.
John Ault disagrees with you (and himself, on what he said previously…)

https://x.com/SamCoatesSky/status/20...661?ct=rw-null

Quote:
Sam Coates Sky
@SamCoatesSky

NEW: Democracy Voluteers hit back at Manchester Council

John Ault, the report author, tells @joncraig "We did raise the issue of family voting with individual presiding officers during the day before we left or when they were not busy."

nomadking 02-03-2026 18:05
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36211539)
John Ault disagrees with you (and himself, on what he said previously…)

https://x.com/SamCoatesSky/status/20...661?ct=rw-null
If that is the case, then the 12% figure is really a lot higher.
I'm wasn't the one complaining that they should've intervened instead.

Hugh 02-03-2026 18:30
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36211561)
If that is the case, then the 12% figure is really a lot higher.

I'm wasn't the one complaining that they should've intervened instead.
No, you were the one saying they couldn’t…

And your first sentence has no basis in reality, reasoning, or logic…

Paul 20-03-2026 22:32
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
The stupid ass has done yet another U turn to drag us into the Iran War.

Sephiroth 02-04-2026 07:57
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
1 Attachment(s)
From today's Torygraph.

papa smurf 02-04-2026 08:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36213300)
From today's Torygraph.
pure genius:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Jaymoss 07-04-2026 08:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
This is absolutely shocking

The original article is top bottom is the views of a barrister




1andrew1 07-04-2026 09:13
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymoss (Post 36213488)
This is absolutely shocking

The original article is top bottom is the views of a barrister
TLDW but both very biased sources.

Jaymoss 07-04-2026 09:32
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36213489)
TLDW but both very biased sources.
oh well that must mean none of it happened then

Julian 07-04-2026 14:22
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36213489)
TLDW but both very biased sources.
Out of interest what, in your expert, professional opinion, would be a non-biased source?

1andrew1 07-04-2026 15:10
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian (Post 36213502)
Out of interest what, in your expert, professional opinion, would be a non-biased source?
I doubt there is such thing as an unbiased source as we all have a degree of bias to us.

But there are less biased sources than the two in question. To me, these would include The Economist, Financial Times, and The Times.

Paul 07-04-2026 18:18
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
What are they actually about ?
I'm not about to watch two long videos.
Esp something thats says its "Explosive","Betrayal" and other obvious click bait phrases.

Jaymoss 07-04-2026 18:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Starmer has claimed he had an active roll in the Rochdale sex trafficking/grooming ring prosecutions

One of the main victims evidence went so deep in the abuse that the powers that be said it was to complex and would open a can of worms they could not afford to follow up on so decided not to use her. The CPS said they could not possibly win without her evidence so this victim was named as a co conspirator so the evidence would be heard. All under Starmers watch . In the first video an ex Police officer quit because of this and exposed the story

Sephiroth 09-04-2026 08:34
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Now, that fool is in the Arabian peninsula.

From what I see, the UK has done nothing during the war to protect the gulf states, despite our long association and the bases we operate there.

Now, I’m a realist. I understand that past governments have hollowed out our military forces and that we are broadly incapable of doing anything meaningful inn gunboat terms.

But the very least that those fools currently in government could do is to move budgets around so that mothballed assets could be brought into use, or something; or commission new destroyers; anything that faces the real threats now in existence, not least Russia.

Hugh 09-04-2026 08:44
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
"done nothing to during the war to protect the Gulf States"

https://www.intellinews.com/uk-s-sta...g-ends-435042/

Quote:
The British government announced vital air defences from the UK are being deployed to Arab monarchies to further support Persian Gulf partners from Iran’s aggressive missiles and drone attacks, which continue across the region.

Defence Secretary John Healey MP said:

"Iran’s aggressive attacks continue to threaten our allies and interests in the Middle East. That’s why the UK has been flying defensive missions since day one of this conflict to protect British interests and allies – and today we’re delivering further support by extending our UK jets in Qatar and deploying extra air defence teams and systems to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait."
What "mothballed assets"?

Commissioning a new destroyer isn’t a quick process…

Quote:
It is taking 11 years to build the first Type 26 frigate, HMS Glasgow and the ‘Global Combat Ship’ design that formed its basis was in gestation for about 30 years. T83 would therefore have to be developed entirely from scratch in about 5 years and built at a similar pace to the much simpler Type 31 frigates.
https://www.navylookout.com/when-wil...-navy-service/

1andrew1 09-04-2026 08:53
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36213629)
Now, that fool is in the Arabian peninsula.

From what I see, the UK has done nothing during the war to protect the gulf states, despite our long association and the bases we operate there.

Now, I’m a realist. I understand that past governments have hollowed out our military forces and that we are broadly incapable of doing anything meaningful inn gunboat terms.

But the very least that those fools currently in government could do is to move budgets around so that mothballed assets could be brought into use, or something; or commission new destroyers; anything that faces the real threats now in existence, not least Russia.
The British bases have played a defensive role so I would not deem to call it nothing. If you look at the Iranian propaganda videos, you will see that they have singled the UK out. They know it even if you don't.
https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...4&d=1775727046

I agree that defence spending has been hollowed out since at least the Coalition government and that the current government is showing a reluctance to increase its spending to a deadline. Any new investment in destroyers takes years to come through and hasty procurement decisions have a habit of not working out...and the MoD does not have the best procurement record as it is.
Attachment 32174

1andrew1 17-04-2026 07:43
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
I can't see him resigning and I doubt his unpopularity can increase much anyway. ;)

He does seem stuck between a rock and a hard place on this though.

Quote:
Keir Starmer battles calls to resign over Peter Mandelson vetting

Badenoch said she did not believe Starmer’s account that he found out only on Tuesday that Mandelson had failed a security vetting check in January 2025, before his ill-fated appointment as UK ambassador to Washington.

“All roads lead to a resignation,” Badenoch said. “It doesn’t matter what story the PM is telling — at some point there is deliberate dishonesty.”

Senior British politicians seldom directly accuse opponents of lying, but Badenoch took the gloves off. She suggested Starmer could not be trusted to tell the truth, even on issues such as the war with Iran. “What else is he lying about?” she said on the BBC.

Her attack raises the pressure on Starmer, whose defence in the Mandelson case rests on his assertion that he was kept in the dark about the security vetting failure by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

Sir Olly Robbins, head of the FCDO, was sacked on Thursday night after Starmer “lost confidence” in him, as the prime minister shifted the blame. Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s former chief of staff, has already quit over the Mandelson affair.

Starmer was said to have been “furious” to learn about the vetting failure this week, apparently only discovering what had happened as officials prepared to release documents about Mandelson’s appointment to parliament.
https://www.ft.com/content/c49c3c31-...syn-25a6b1a6=1

GrimUpNorth 17-04-2026 08:22
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36214019)
I can't see him resigning and I doubt his unpopularity can increase much anyway. ;)

He does seem stuck between a rock and a hard place on this though.


https://www.ft.com/content/c49c3c31-...syn-25a6b1a6=1
The decent thing to do would be resign, but I feel at best all we can expect is for him to convene a meeting. It's all he ever seems to do, but I suppose when your out of ideas and options what else have you got left?

nomadking 17-04-2026 08:30
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Be interesting to know what it was that led to Mandelson's failing of security vetting.

TheDaddy 17-04-2026 09:32
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36214019)
I can't see him resigning and I doubt his unpopularity can increase much anyway. ;)

He does seem stuck between a rock and a hard place on this though.
He should've told the truth and added he thought having one of epstein's chums as ambassador would help British interests with trumps america

Sephiroth 17-04-2026 09:37
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
I like seeing the sod squirm. One question though: Did Olly Robbins know that the mandelson vetting had failed? Point being if he didn’t know, but as head of the FO service, Robbins fell on his sword, tghen Starmer should do the same.

Kemi also needs to ask what instructions the FO has received from No. 10 in respect of gwetting Mandelson through the process. Obviously, Starmer can’t wriggle out of that.



---------- Post added at 10:37 ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36214025)
Be interesting to know what it was that led to Mandelson's failing of security vetting.
Pillow talk risk?

OLD BOY 18-04-2026 11:53
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36214035)
I like seeing the sod squirm. One question though: Did Olly Robbins know that the mandelson vetting had failed? Point being if he didn’t know, but as head of the FO service, Robbins fell on his sword, tghen Starmer should do the same.

Kemi also needs to ask what instructions the FO has received from No. 10 in respect of gwetting Mandelson through the process. Obviously, Starmer can’t wriggle out of that.



---------- Post added at 10:37 ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 ----------



Pillow talk risk?
Starmer can wriggle out of any question by answering another question that nobody asked.

I really don’t know how there can be so much confusion over this. Who was the outcome of the security check passed to? What did they do with that information and who made the decision to ignore it? Whoever that was, I’m sure they will be able to tell us if the PM was informed, and if not, why not?

The fact that they still haven’t got to the bottom of this does indicate to me that something’s being covered up.

Sirius 18-04-2026 12:03
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36214082)
Starmer can wriggle out of any question by answering another question that nobody asked.

I really don’t know how there can be so much confusion over this. Who was the outcome of the security check passed to? What did they do with that information and who made the decision to ignore it? Whoever that was, I’m sure they will be able to tell us if the PM was informed, and if not, why not?

The fact that they still haven’t got to the bottom of this does indicate to me that something’s being covered up.
All it will take is a disgruntled person close to the coal face to leak a memo or email. Then it will all be over for what is in my opinium the worst prime minister this country has had the misfortune to have voted in. I will say it as i see it "he is a treacherous two faced lying piece of excreta" :)

papa smurf 18-04-2026 14:12
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36214085)
All it will take is a disgruntled person close to the coal face to leak a memo or email. Then it will all be over for what is in my opinium the worst prime minister this country has had the misfortune to have voted in. I will say it as i see it "he is a treacherous two faced lying piece of excreta" :)
:clap::clap::clap:

Sirius 18-04-2026 15:26
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36214091)
:clap::clap::clap:
Why thank you Papa :)

Paul 18-04-2026 22:31
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
A quote (about Starmer) I saw in a BBC article tonight made me smile.

Quote:
It's not possible to put any more nails in his coffin without it being made of nails.

1andrew1 19-04-2026 09:51
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36214025)
Be interesting to know what it was that led to Mandelson's failing of security vetting.
The Sunday Times says it was his foreign links. The consultancy company which Mandelson founded and still had shares in had its largest client as a Chinese company linked by some to the Chinese army, but the links were denied by the company itself.

Itshim 19-04-2026 10:00
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
My dad used to say a lawyer is a fool that can read and remember what they have read. They have no plan if it is not in a book .They can't think for them selves. Never employ them for anything but defending you. Yet we have made him our leader , just look at the mess that has brought on us.

---------- Post added at 11:00 ---------- Previous post was at 10:56 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36214131)
The Sunday Times says it was his foreign links. The consultancy company which Mandelson founded and still had shares in had its largest client as a Chinese company linked by some to the Chinese army, but the links were denied by the company itself.
The question is given the known facts about him . Why on earth select him in the first place. What was Starmer thinking....... I have my own idea but clearly l could not publish them.

1andrew1 19-04-2026 21:11
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36214132)
The question is given the known facts about him . Why on earth select him in the first place. What was Starmer thinking....... I have my own idea but clearly l could not publish them.
The known facts being his previous association with Epstein which should have ruled him out in most people's calculations.

So there's been a ruthless calculation done between the benefits to the government of someone felt able to get on well with the Trump regime and the downside of his Epstein associations.

But how you can appoint someone who's failed civil service vetting seems bizarre. Let's see what the coming week unveils; I'm sure some will be relieved that Trump and the Iranian situation are hogging a lot of the headlines.

Sephiroth 19-04-2026 21:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36214174)
The known facts being his previous association with Epstein which should have ruled him out in most people's calculations.

So there's been a ruthless calculation done between the benefits to the government of someone felt able to get on well with the Trump regime and the downside of his Epstein associations.

But how you can appoint someone who's failed civil service vetting seems bizarre. Let's see what the coming week unveils; I'm sure some will be relieved that Trump and the Iranian situation are hogging a lot of the headlines.

Quote:
So there's been a ruthless calculation done between the benefits to the government of someone felt able to get on well with the Trump regime and the downside of his Epstein associations.
Yes - I agree. Rogues alike.

Dingbat 19-04-2026 21:31
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36214174)

But how you can appoint someone who's failed civil service vetting seems bizarre. Let's see what the coming week unveils; I'm sure some will be relieved that Trump and the Iranian situation are hogging a lot of the headlines.
Seemed to work well enough for Boris Johnson when he apparently failed vetting but was still made Foreign Secretary by Theresa May.

Hugh 19-04-2026 21:37
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Personally, I’d have taken that more as a warning than a precedent…

1andrew1 20-04-2026 08:50
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingbat (Post 36214176)
Seemed to work well enough for Boris Johnson when he apparently failed vetting but was still made Foreign Secretary by Theresa May.
Yes, and look how that turned out!

1andrew1 20-04-2026 12:50
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Starmer was advised Mandelson should be vetted before appointment, documents show

Sir Keir Starmer was advised that a political appointee such as Peter Mandelson should undergo national security vetting before he was formally appointed, documents uncovered by Sky News show.

In papers published by the government under the terms of the humble address mandating the release of documents, there is a letter from the then cabinet secretary, Lord Simon Case, setting out the process ahead of the appointment.

The then top civil servant wrote to the prime minister:

"You should give us the name of the person you would like to appoint and we will develop a plan for them to acquire the necessary security clearances and do due diligence on any potential Conflicts of Interest or other issues of which you should be aware before confirming your choice."

This note was sent to the PM on 11 November 2024.

Mandelson was announced as the PM's choice for US ambassador on 20 December 2024, and vetting took place after that.

It has since emerged that Mandelson, who was later sacked from the role after further details emerged about his relationship with the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, failed the process.

However, he was granted security clearance by the top civil servant in the Foreign Office...

Sir Keir Starmer is going to address MPs in the House of Commons at 3.30pm over the Peter Mandelson vetting scandal
https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...bbins-12593360

Itshim 20-04-2026 14:07
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
I repeat is he the only person in the world not to know mandelsons track record

1andrew1 20-04-2026 14:53
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36214209)
I repeat is he the only person in the world not to know mandelsons track record
Starmer obviously knows it but thought he was a better fit with the Trump administration than other candidates.

Hugh 20-04-2026 15:06
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36214209)
I repeat is he the only person in the world not to know mandelsons track record
Well, the Daily Mail/Dan Hodges called him "the perfect choice" and co-hosted and funded his Ambassador's party at the British Embassy in Washington last April, so they must have liked him...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...mbassador.html

Quote:
Peter Mandelson is cynical, manipulative, ruthless, calculating, cunning and ambitious – and the perfect choice to be Britain’s new ambassador to Washington.

The Prime Minister’s decision to appoint the man once dubbed ‘The Prince of Darkness’ to the coveted role has caused consternation, especially among his old foes in the Labour movement.

‘For many reasons associated with Peter Mandelson’s history in and out of political office, many people will feel Keir has lost all sense of political judgment on this decision,’ raged Corbynite former Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell.

‘Ugh!’ fumed Diane Abbott. ‘Mandelson [is] repeatedly referred to as a “big hitter” or “big beast”, even by himself! [These terms are] never applied to women in politics with just as much experience, some who have never been sacked from government or who have supported far fewer wars.’

But howls of Leftist anguish simply serve to underline the wisdom of the decision.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/us-...hdc-party.html

Quote:
Published: 22:06, 26 April 2025 | Updated: 22:34, 26 April 2025

The MAGA stars were out and shining at The Daily Mail party on Friday ahead of the White House Correspondents' Dinner party.

From Trump administration officials like Veterans Affairs Sec. Doug Collins and Administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Mehmet Oz, to conservative influencers Savannah Chrisley and Sean Spicer, the event at the British Ambassador's Residence drew a buzzing crowd of MAGALands' most influential.

Nestled among the palatial compounds and embassies on Washington's famed Massachusetts Avenue, the event at the British Ambassador's Residence, hosted alongside The Brunswick Group, featured an array of cocktails, whiskey tastings, British hors d'oeuvres, an address from Lord Peter Mandelson.

Guests also mingled around the DailyMail.com blue carpet, where some stopped to share their thoughts on President Trump's first 100 days in office.

Itshim 20-04-2026 20:24
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36214215)
Well, the Daily Mail/Dan Hodges called him "the perfect choice" and co-hosted and funded his Ambassador's party at the British Embassy in Washington last April, so they must have liked him...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...mbassador.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/us-...hdc-party.html
Since when is the daily mail or any other news paper to taken at face value. :shocked:

nomadking 20-04-2026 22:16
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36214215)
Well, the Daily Mail/Dan Hodges called him "the perfect choice" and co-hosted and funded his Ambassador's party at the British Embassy in Washington last April, so they must have liked him...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...mbassador.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/us-...hdc-party.html
So what? It wasn't a party for Mandelson, it was a party for the British Embassy, regardless of who the Ambassador was.

Hugh 20-04-2026 23:46
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36214231)
So what? It wasn't a party for Mandelson, it was a party for the British Embassy, regardless of who the Ambassador was.
Quote:
Well, the Daily Mail/Dan Hodges called him "the perfect choice"

nomadking 21-04-2026 06:33
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
That was before anything came out.
Plus :-
Quote:
Peter Mandelson is cynical, manipulative, ruthless, calculating, cunning and ambitious – and the perfect choice to be Britain’s new ambassador to Washington.

1andrew1 21-04-2026 07:15
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36214236)
That was before anything came out.
Plus :-
Before anything came out? His association with Epstein has been known since 2019. He was also forced to resign from two previous governments for shady behaviour.

nomadking 21-04-2026 08:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36214237)
Before anything came out? His association with Epstein has been known since 2019. He was also forced to resign from two previous governments for shady behaviour.
A whole bunch of people were associated with Epstein, including Bill Clinton. The reasons for the failed vetting wasn't connected to Epstein.
The failure of the vetting was publicised(The Independent and spoken about in Parliament) in Sept 2025. Yet somehow Starmer didn't know until a few days ago.
Loved one of the comments in Parliament that Starmer "will run out of buses before he runs out of people to throw under them".:D

Carth 21-04-2026 09:17
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Hmmm, sacked minister questioned by Foreign Affairs Select Committee seems to be attempting to kick Starmer in the nuts whilst also patting him on the back.

Just normal everyday practice from anyone remotely involved with politics :D

Hugh 21-04-2026 09:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Senior Civil Servant, not Minister…

papa smurf 21-04-2026 11:41
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36214239)
Hmmm, sacked minister questioned by Foreign Affairs Select Committee seems to be attempting to kick Starmer in the nuts whilst also patting him on the back.

Just normal everyday practice from anyone remotely involved with politics :D


he's holding back the good stuff as he has a wrongful dismissal case to sort out and protect his pension from starmers vengeance

Carth 21-04-2026 11:56
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36214243)
Senior Civil Servant, not Minister…
aah, thanks for explaining, although it's a fancy name for a secretary isn't it?

:D


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:45.
Page 27 of 28 « First 1723242526 27 28
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum