The Chronicles of Rishi

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I've already provided the info regarding the Blair government period.

Yes you have, and I dismissed it by reminding you that none of his government/cabinet are in frontline politics anymore.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

You know as well as I what politics and politicians are like with regard to patronage.

Yeah you’d do pretty well to not to assume what you *think* you know about me.

So going back to my mini-challenge - no, you can’t supply any verifiable evidence of of government corruption by this Labour Party.

One of the many many differences between you and I is I tend to prefer to wait until someone has actually done something before I condemn them that way.

---------- Post added at 21:12 ---------- Previous post was at 21:09 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Here we go again, with the old "everyone knows" Alleged Certainty fallacy…

Come on Hugh that’s not fair.

How else are they to get their point across?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Here we go again, with the old "everyone knows" Alleged Certainty fallacy…

Some things are well known - such as what I've pointed out. Maybe certain Labour supporters are blind to anything being wrong with their darling party. The proof of that lies in the recent posts.

---------- Post added at 20:22 ---------- Previous post was at 20:15 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

Yes you have, and I dismissed it by reminding you that none of his government/cabinet are in frontline politics anymore.

Yeah you’d do pretty well to not to assume what you *think* you know about me.

So going back to my mini-challenge - no, you can’t supply any verifiable evidence of of government corruption by this Labour Party.

One of the many many differences between you and I is I tend to prefer to wait until someone has actually done something before I condemn them that way.

---------- Post added at 21:12 ---------- Previous post was at 21:09 ----------



Come on Hugh that’s not fair.

How else are they to get their point across?

You condemn anyone who is of a Tory disposition.

And you have quite a rabble behind you.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

You condemn anyone who is of a Tory disposition.

No I don't. I just can't stand any **** MP who has held a cabinet position in the past 14 years as well as any of their colleagues who defend the behaviour.

I actually know a **** party MP, I use to work with her in radio 25 years ago. We never discuss politics and at least she had the grace to step down from her position after bullshitting Boris' bullshitting became too much to bear.

I can at least respect her for that.

[Sephiroth]

Your **** reference is all we need to know.

[Russ]

Cool, I’m glad the message is getting across.

After what they did to this country in 14 years (and particularly during the previous 4) I’m happy to keep calling them the **** party.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Instead of nitpicking, you should recognise the point I'm making. Both parties reward their benefactors. Always have done, always will do.

Should I ? Says who ? I’m not going to take direction nor instruction from a smart price wannabe Enoch Powell

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Some things are well known - such as what I've pointed out. Maybe certain Labour supporters are blind to anything being wrong with their darling party. The proof of that lies in the recent posts.

---------- Post added at 20:22 ---------- Previous post was at 20:15 ----------



You condemn anyone who is of a Tory disposition.

And you have quite a rabble behind you.

One fallacy followed by another (Ad Hominem attack) - it’s almost as if you can’t refute counter propositions with actual facts or evidence…

Update

Well, both Sunak and Badenoch have said the donor’s comments were racist…

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Hugh

<SNIP>

Well, both Sunak and Badenoch have said the donor’s comments were racist…

Of course the remarks were racist.

The man just said too much.

[jfman]

Suspect if Rishi handed back all the money from racists the party wouldn’t have much left in the coffers.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by jfman

Suspect if Rishi handed back all the money from racists the party wouldn’t have much left in the coffers.

Check out money given to the possible next Welsh labour leader, the payment made to him reported widely . ( born guessing)

Originally Posted by jfman

Suspect if Rishi handed back all the money from racists the party wouldn’t have much left in the coffers.

This probably is the reason. £10 million is a lot for UK politics and they might not have the liquid funds to return it so easily.

https://news.sky.com/story/the-mood-...worse-13094133

Regarding the timing of a General Election this year

One Tory minister said that one justification for going later would be for younger MP colleagues, who have built up debt, to earn a few more months salary over the summer.

[jfman]

It's pathetic that is the logic being applied by people supposedly running the country.

[1andrew1]

Every day is Poets' Day for MPs under Sunak!

MPs clock off early as length of Commons work day hits record low

Rishi Sunak accused of presiding over a ‘zombie parliament’

The working day for MPs in the House of Commons chamber has been shorter on average this parliamentary session than in any other in the past quarter century, according to a Financial Times analysis.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has been accused of presiding over a “zombie parliament”, with opposition parties arguing the relative shortness of the average parliamentary day shows an administration running “out of steam”.

The average duration of a Commons sitting day in the current parliamentary session, which began in November, has been 7 hours and 9 minutes, a record low since New Labour came to power in 1997, the FT found.

“There’s very little going on day to day,” conceded one Conservative minister. A Labour insider argued some prime debating slots in the chamber were being dedicated to “niche” issues to fill time.

On Tuesday last week the Commons adjourned at 3.53pm, while on one Monday earlier this month almost five hours were dedicated to an unfocused “general debate on farming”, critics pointed out.

The FT analysis used parliamentary data going back 27 years — the data is available online — as well as Commons Library research.

Between 1997 and 2023 the average was 7 hours and 58 minutes — or 49 minutes longer than in the current session, the analysis showed. The peak was 9 hours and 15 minutes in the 1998-99 session of Tony Blair’s first administration.

https://www.ft.com/content/fef202b8-...6-cbb6db52f0f0

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

This probably is the reason. £10 million is a lot for UK politics and they might not have the liquid funds to return it so easily.

Looks like they've received an additional £5m from Hester recently.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b2512748.html