Should MPs have a pay rise?

3:20pm Tuesday 15th January 2013 in Local News

ESSEX MPs have criticised demands by colleagues to hike their salaries by a third to £86,000 a year.

Tory MPs John Baron and Stephen Metcalfe spoke out after an anonymous survey for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) found the average parliamentarian believed their annual wage should rise by £21,000.

According to the research by YouGov, 69 per cent of MPs thought they were underpaid on £65,738.

However, Mr Metcalfe, who represents South Basildon and East Thurrock, revealed he had refused to take part in the survey.

He said: “I do not think, and have never thought, that MPs should have a say in deciding their own salary.

“I did not want any part in that. It is a privilege to do this job and we are already paid a generous salary.

“That is what is important to me.”

Mr Baron, who represents Basildon and Billericay, also said he had never voted on his own pay or pension. H

owever, the MP of 12 years did respond to IPSA and suggested a complete overhaul of the payment system.

Mr Baron called for all expenses to be cancelled, and a proportion of the ensuing savings added to MPs’ salaries.

He said: “That has the twofold effect of reducing the cost to the taxpayer significantly and making the system much more transparent.

“Expenses have been clouding the issue for some time now.

“By removing that, we could once and for all increase public confidence in the system.”

IPSA’s initial consultation on MPs’ wages ended last month. Final decisions are due to be taken in the spring, with a new system not taking effect until after the 2015 general election.

On average, Tories said their salary should be £96,740, while Lib Dems thought the right amount was £78,361 and Labour £77,322.

One MP insisted they should get £40,000 or less, but a fifth of those questioned said they deserved £95,000 or more.

The overall average suggestion was £86,250. The research found 27 per cent of the MPs wanted their pay to go up by more than one per cent over the next two years - despite public sector rises and most working age benefits being controversially capped at that level.

However, nearly two-thirds supported IPSA’s decision to impose the same discipline.

The watchdog did bow to pressure by agreeing to reopen the subject of “golden goodbyes”, after 53 per cent insisted members should be entitled to tens of thousands of pounds even if they step down from parliament voluntarily.

The report said Ipsa was “not convinced” it was right to provide such pay-offs, pointing out that most employees did not get similar benefits.

But it added: “It is clear that this is a complex issue. The problem, and possible solutions, deserve further examination.”

The MPs’ feedback was met with disbelief by union chiefs, who accused them of living in “cloud cuckoo land”.

Unison general secretary Dave Prentis said: “MPs should get real about pay, this shows they are totally out of touch with working people.

“How can they think that they deserve a 32 per cent increase when the rest of the country is being told to tighten their belts?

“No wonder this research is anonymous, it shows real contempt for the plight of families across the country struggling to make ends meet.”

Matthew Sinclair, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, added: “Hiking politicians' wages at a time of pay freezes, benefit caps and necessary spending cuts would be completely unpalatable to taxpayers.

“To do so would suggest that there is one rule for MPs and another for the rest of the country. There is zero appetite for a pay rise for MPs, as borne out by the polling of the public commissioned by IPSA.

“Most people clearly think that an MP's salary is currently about right.”

Comments (54)

3:40pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

Self. Serving. Scum.
Self. Serving. Scum. Shoebury_Cyclist

3:51pm Tue 15 Jan 13

woolstone says...

Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!! woolstone

4:05pm Tue 15 Jan 13

perini says...

Never in a thousand years - a pay cut would be better, and then have performance related pay.
Never in a thousand years - a pay cut would be better, and then have performance related pay. perini

4:13pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Eric Whim says...

they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly.

It's called 'lead by example'.
they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'. Eric Whim

4:35pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Broadwaywatch says...

Eric Whim wrote:
they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly.

It's called 'lead by example'.
No, NO, No its called lead by greed!
[quote][p][bold]Eric Whim[/bold] wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.[/p][/quote]No, NO, No its called lead by greed! Broadwaywatch

4:37pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

Eric Whim wrote:
they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly.

It's called 'lead by example'.
MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%.

The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase.
Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each.

I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims?
[quote][p][bold]Eric Whim[/bold] wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.[/p][/quote]MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%. The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase. Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each. I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims? Shoebury_Cyclist

4:38pm Tue 15 Jan 13

fletch12107 says...

Theresa May wants to cut the starting salary of a Police Constable by £4k to £19k which is a 17% drop. So as we are all in it together then I am certain that she will be happy to reduce hers by the same amount as will all the other greedy MP's.
Theresa May wants to cut the starting salary of a Police Constable by £4k to £19k which is a 17% drop. So as we are all in it together then I am certain that she will be happy to reduce hers by the same amount as will all the other greedy MP's. fletch12107

5:07pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Nebs says...

I think MP's are worth a lot more than they are currently paid. However there are too many. Halve the number of MP's at the next general election, and give those that are elected a 50% pay rise. Everyones a winner.
I think MP's are worth a lot more than they are currently paid. However there are too many. Halve the number of MP's at the next general election, and give those that are elected a 50% pay rise. Everyones a winner. Nebs

5:07pm Tue 15 Jan 13

notinwestcliffanymore says...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Eric Whim wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.
MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%. The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase. Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each. I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims?
You have the neck to call these self serving scum, yet you seem to advocate reckless spending on benefits. me thinks you would liked to served from my hard earned tax..
.
the best way to improve your life is to get a job, and before you start if half of poland can find work over here i'm sure you could if you don't like a 1% increase in your well earned hand out.
[quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eric Whim[/bold] wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.[/p][/quote]MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%. The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase. Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each. I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims?[/p][/quote]You have the neck to call these self serving scum, yet you seem to advocate reckless spending on benefits. me thinks you would liked to served from my hard earned tax.. . the best way to improve your life is to get a job, and before you start if half of poland can find work over here i'm sure you could if you don't like a 1% increase in your well earned hand out. notinwestcliffanymore

5:17pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Test Tickle says...

We had better have a whip round for these poor old MP's.....can you give just two pounds a month!
We had better have a whip round for these poor old MP's.....can you give just two pounds a month! Test Tickle

5:31pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Eric Whim says...

how will Mr Amess be able to afford to feed his family on only 65 large a year?
how will Mr Amess be able to afford to feed his family on only 65 large a year? Eric Whim

5:34pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Max 269 says...

let them eat cake, then cut their heads off later. via la france
let them eat cake, then cut their heads off later. via la france Max 269

5:54pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

notinwestcliffanymor
e wrote:
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Eric Whim wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.
MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%. The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase. Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each. I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims?
You have the neck to call these self serving scum, yet you seem to advocate reckless spending on benefits. me thinks you would liked to served from my hard earned tax..
.
the best way to improve your life is to get a job, and before you start if half of poland can find work over here i'm sure you could if you don't like a 1% increase in your well earned hand out.
I do have a job you feckwit. I've paid tax all my life.

How long does it take someone to become a 'shirker' in your ignorant bigoted tory world?

Are those Jessops employees - who had jobs last week but not this week - are they 'shirkers' yet? Maybe the 4000 HMV employees will be 'shirkers' by the end of the week? What about all those Comet employees, are they 'shirkers' yet?


I pay tax and national insurance so that should I fall on hard times there is a welfare state there to help me. You would have us all paying tax for no reason at all.
[quote][p][bold]notinwestcliffanymor e[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eric Whim[/bold] wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.[/p][/quote]MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%. The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase. Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each. I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims?[/p][/quote]You have the neck to call these self serving scum, yet you seem to advocate reckless spending on benefits. me thinks you would liked to served from my hard earned tax.. . the best way to improve your life is to get a job, and before you start if half of poland can find work over here i'm sure you could if you don't like a 1% increase in your well earned hand out.[/p][/quote]I do have a job you feckwit. I've paid tax all my life. How long does it take someone to become a 'shirker' in your ignorant bigoted tory world? Are those Jessops employees - who had jobs last week but not this week - are they 'shirkers' yet? Maybe the 4000 HMV employees will be 'shirkers' by the end of the week? What about all those Comet employees, are they 'shirkers' yet? I pay tax and national insurance so that should I fall on hard times there is a welfare state there to help me. You would have us all paying tax for no reason at all. Shoebury_Cyclist

5:57pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

Last week a government of millionaires laughed as they made the poor poorer. We should be hanging these self-serving pigs from the lampposts of Westminster:

http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/voices/comm
ent/the-welfare-bill
-a-government-of-mil
lionaires-just-made-
the-poor-poorer--and
-laughed-as-they-did
-it-8443619.html
Last week a government of millionaires laughed as they made the poor poorer. We should be hanging these self-serving pigs from the lampposts of Westminster: http://www.independe nt.co.uk/voices/comm ent/the-welfare-bill -a-government-of-mil lionaires-just-made- the-poor-poorer--and -laughed-as-they-did -it-8443619.html Shoebury_Cyclist

8:41pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Nebs wrote:
I think MP's are worth a lot more than they are currently paid. However there are too many. Halve the number of MP's at the next general election, and give those that are elected a 50% pay rise. Everyones a winner.
yes wonder who it is that opposes the re-drawing of the electoral boundaries to reduce the number of bureaucrats in westminster. yep you guessed it...the labour/liberal self serving scum as i think the term has now officially been coined.
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: I think MP's are worth a lot more than they are currently paid. However there are too many. Halve the number of MP's at the next general election, and give those that are elected a 50% pay rise. Everyones a winner.[/p][/quote]yes wonder who it is that opposes the re-drawing of the electoral boundaries to reduce the number of bureaucrats in westminster. yep you guessed it...the labour/liberal self serving scum as i think the term has now officially been coined. asbo. just the truth

8:46pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
notinwestcliffanymor

e wrote:
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Eric Whim wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.
MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%. The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase. Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each. I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims?
You have the neck to call these self serving scum, yet you seem to advocate reckless spending on benefits. me thinks you would liked to served from my hard earned tax..
.
the best way to improve your life is to get a job, and before you start if half of poland can find work over here i'm sure you could if you don't like a 1% increase in your well earned hand out.
I do have a job you feckwit. I've paid tax all my life.

How long does it take someone to become a 'shirker' in your ignorant bigoted tory world?

Are those Jessops employees - who had jobs last week but not this week - are they 'shirkers' yet? Maybe the 4000 HMV employees will be 'shirkers' by the end of the week? What about all those Comet employees, are they 'shirkers' yet?


I pay tax and national insurance so that should I fall on hard times there is a welfare state there to help me. You would have us all paying tax for no reason at all.
no don't believe it. you're one of those benefit sucking monkeys. hard times..kuh...you got your weekly handouts to keep your larder stocked with dog food. cushty!
[quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]notinwestcliffanymor e[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eric Whim[/bold] wrote: they should be pegged at 1% like they've done to benefit claimants - we are all in it together after all, allegedly. It's called 'lead by example'.[/p][/quote]MPs pay rises ARE pegged at a 1%, that was their reasoning for limiting benefit rises to 1%. The only thing with that is that 1% of £71 JSA is 71p extra a week, when the rate of inflation is 2.7%. So a JSA claimant gets a £36.92 per year increase in their benefit while the cost of living rapidly outstrips that paltry increase. Meanwhile our 'in it together' MPs - on their annual salaries of £65,738 - get a whopping £657.38 a year increase. Each. I'd like to know in what possible world is that 'fair', as Head Pig David Cameron claims?[/p][/quote]You have the neck to call these self serving scum, yet you seem to advocate reckless spending on benefits. me thinks you would liked to served from my hard earned tax.. . the best way to improve your life is to get a job, and before you start if half of poland can find work over here i'm sure you could if you don't like a 1% increase in your well earned hand out.[/p][/quote]I do have a job you feckwit. I've paid tax all my life. How long does it take someone to become a 'shirker' in your ignorant bigoted tory world? Are those Jessops employees - who had jobs last week but not this week - are they 'shirkers' yet? Maybe the 4000 HMV employees will be 'shirkers' by the end of the week? What about all those Comet employees, are they 'shirkers' yet? I pay tax and national insurance so that should I fall on hard times there is a welfare state there to help me. You would have us all paying tax for no reason at all.[/p][/quote]no don't believe it. you're one of those benefit sucking monkeys. hard times..kuh...you got your weekly handouts to keep your larder stocked with dog food. cushty! asbo. just the truth

8:56pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
[quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1 asbo. just the truth

9:10pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she? Shoebury_Cyclist

9:18pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right? Devils Advocate

9:27pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?
so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering" sometime back in the bronze age?
[quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?[/p][/quote]so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering" sometime back in the bronze age? asbo. just the truth

9:28pm Tue 15 Jan 13

notinwestcliffanymore says...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Are those Jessops employees - who had jobs last week but not this week - are they 'shirkers' yet? Maybe the 4000 HMV employees will be 'shirkers' by the end of the week? What about all those Comet employees, are they 'shirkers' yet?.
.These are the very people that are harmed most by the profligate use of the benefits system. If money was not handed out to millions of people for who signing on is a job, there would be more in the pot to help those that have put something into the pot..
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote: Are those Jessops employees - who had jobs last week but not this week - are they 'shirkers' yet? Maybe the 4000 HMV employees will be 'shirkers' by the end of the week? What about all those Comet employees, are they 'shirkers' yet?. .These are the very people that are harmed most by the profligate use of the benefits system. If money was not handed out to millions of people for who signing on is a job, there would be more in the pot to help those that have put something into the pot.. notinwestcliffanymore

9:30pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?
scum was not my word, it was the term used by your comrade shoebury clownski
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?[/p][/quote]scum was not my word, it was the term used by your comrade shoebury clownski asbo. just the truth

9:42pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?
Last Poster, any talk of democracy by the left wing is hypocrisy in the extreme. how does the block vote sit with fair democratic principles?
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?[/p][/quote]Last Poster, any talk of democracy by the left wing is hypocrisy in the extreme. how does the block vote sit with fair democratic principles? asbo. just the truth

9:42pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Nebs says...

Lets not forget that if Scotland gets its independence then there is only one possible election result for the rest of the UK.
Lets not forget that if Scotland gets its independence then there is only one possible election result for the rest of the UK. Nebs

9:43pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?
scum was not my word, it was the term used by your comrade shoebury clownski
Yes I know. But have you flicked up the comments and picked your adjectives out? I haven't got enough fingers to put that lot in. Still, at least he wasn't trying to defer his banking bonuses until April to make that easy earnt fortune be worth yet another 5p in the pound!
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?[/p][/quote]scum was not my word, it was the term used by your comrade shoebury clownski[/p][/quote]Yes I know. But have you flicked up the comments and picked your adjectives out? I haven't got enough fingers to put that lot in. Still, at least he wasn't trying to defer his banking bonuses until April to make that easy earnt fortune be worth yet another 5p in the pound! Devils Advocate

9:49pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?
Last Poster, any talk of democracy by the left wing is hypocrisy in the extreme. how does the block vote sit with fair democratic principles?
It sits just fine in my book. But, how does undemocratic usage of British soldiers to try to oust the new leadership of Russia after the first world war, an illegal action, made under the guise of protecting our supplies,which was kept secret even from Parliament, yet led by one of the "Greatest politicians" (Conservative) of all time?
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?[/p][/quote]Last Poster, any talk of democracy by the left wing is hypocrisy in the extreme. how does the block vote sit with fair democratic principles?[/p][/quote]It sits just fine in my book. But, how does undemocratic usage of British soldiers to try to oust the new leadership of Russia after the first world war, an illegal action, made under the guise of protecting our supplies,which was kept secret even from Parliament, yet led by one of the "Greatest politicians" (Conservative) of all time? Devils Advocate

9:51pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?
scum was not my word, it was the term used by your comrade shoebury clownski
Yes I know. But have you flicked up the comments and picked your adjectives out? I haven't got enough fingers to put that lot in. Still, at least he wasn't trying to defer his banking bonuses until April to make that easy earnt fortune be worth yet another 5p in the pound!
well our political hue is not that disimilar. the problem is you can't bail out the banks and expect them to behave like model citizens. the banks should have been left to fail and the bankers beheaded. next time i'm in basildon i'll buy you a pint. my identity is no secret.
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?[/p][/quote]scum was not my word, it was the term used by your comrade shoebury clownski[/p][/quote]Yes I know. But have you flicked up the comments and picked your adjectives out? I haven't got enough fingers to put that lot in. Still, at least he wasn't trying to defer his banking bonuses until April to make that easy earnt fortune be worth yet another 5p in the pound![/p][/quote]well our political hue is not that disimilar. the problem is you can't bail out the banks and expect them to behave like model citizens. the banks should have been left to fail and the bankers beheaded. next time i'm in basildon i'll buy you a pint. my identity is no secret. asbo. just the truth

9:58pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
Devils Advocate wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?
Last Poster, any talk of democracy by the left wing is hypocrisy in the extreme. how does the block vote sit with fair democratic principles?
It sits just fine in my book. But, how does undemocratic usage of British soldiers to try to oust the new leadership of Russia after the first world war, an illegal action, made under the guise of protecting our supplies,which was kept secret even from Parliament, yet led by one of the "Greatest politicians" (Conservative) of all time?
they don't make 'em like that anymore i'm afraid. more's the pity
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]So what do you call the using of postal votes of dead people to gain a majority? disallowing of working class people to vote, is that good politics? Before you start calling other people scum, how about you losing your anonimity so we can see if you are one of the greedy right?[/p][/quote]Last Poster, any talk of democracy by the left wing is hypocrisy in the extreme. how does the block vote sit with fair democratic principles?[/p][/quote]It sits just fine in my book. But, how does undemocratic usage of British soldiers to try to oust the new leadership of Russia after the first world war, an illegal action, made under the guise of protecting our supplies,which was kept secret even from Parliament, yet led by one of the "Greatest politicians" (Conservative) of all time?[/p][/quote]they don't make 'em like that anymore i'm afraid. more's the pity asbo. just the truth

10:01pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

That may well be true, but democracy is a many faceted flower and obviously offers a different perfume to noses that are of a different shade. Sadly, mine is now big, red and shiny. Probably because of all this global warming we are enduring at the moment!
That may well be true, but democracy is a many faceted flower and obviously offers a different perfume to noses that are of a different shade. Sadly, mine is now big, red and shiny. Probably because of all this global warming we are enduring at the moment! Devils Advocate

10:05pm Tue 15 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
That may well be true, but democracy is a many faceted flower and obviously offers a different perfume to noses that are of a different shade. Sadly, mine is now big, red and shiny. Probably because of all this global warming we are enduring at the moment!
think you might have lost your sense of smell!
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: That may well be true, but democracy is a many faceted flower and obviously offers a different perfume to noses that are of a different shade. Sadly, mine is now big, red and shiny. Probably because of all this global warming we are enduring at the moment![/p][/quote]think you might have lost your sense of smell! asbo. just the truth

8:06am Wed 16 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?
so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering
" sometime back in the bronze age?
Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats.

You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/news/politics
/david-cameron/97977
53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C
ameron-renews-scrap-
with-Lib-Dem-over-bo
undary-changes.html

They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats.

Never. Trust. A. Tory.
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?[/p][/quote]so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering " sometime back in the bronze age?[/p][/quote]Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats. You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /david-cameron/97977 53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C ameron-renews-scrap- with-Lib-Dem-over-bo undary-changes.html They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats. Never. Trust. A. Tory. Shoebury_Cyclist

9:15am Wed 16 Jan 13

Walt Jabsco says...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote:
Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?
so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering

" sometime back in the bronze age?
Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats.

You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph

.co.uk/news/politics

/david-cameron/97977

53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C

ameron-renews-scrap-

with-Lib-Dem-over-bo

undary-changes.html

They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats.

Never. Trust. A. Tory.
I would expand on your last point and say never trust a politician - if you can point me in the direction of one worthwhile of trust please do.
[quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?[/p][/quote]so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering " sometime back in the bronze age?[/p][/quote]Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats. You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /david-cameron/97977 53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C ameron-renews-scrap- with-Lib-Dem-over-bo undary-changes.html They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats. Never. Trust. A. Tory.[/p][/quote]I would expand on your last point and say never trust a politician - if you can point me in the direction of one worthwhile of trust please do. Walt Jabsco

11:54am Wed 16 Jan 13

Alekhine says...

Nebs wrote:
Lets not forget that if Scotland gets its independence then there is only one possible election result for the rest of the UK.
If Scotland gets independence it will have to reapply for membership of the EU. This may affect the grants it receives (chuckle).
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: Lets not forget that if Scotland gets its independence then there is only one possible election result for the rest of the UK.[/p][/quote]If Scotland gets independence it will have to reapply for membership of the EU. This may affect the grants it receives (chuckle). Alekhine

12:24pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Alekhine says...

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?
so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering " sometime back in the bronze age?
Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats. You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /david-cameron/97977 53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C ameron-renews-scrap- with-Lib-Dem-over-bo undary-changes.html They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats. Never. Trust. A. Tory.
It does pale a bit in comparison with Labour's back door immigration policy. The ultimate in gerrymandering.

It was/is unsustainable/unnaff
ordable as were their policies on borrowing, benefits, war, putting the UK at the heart of the EU (did someone mention cutting the numbers of our representatives?). This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class.
[quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?[/p][/quote]so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering " sometime back in the bronze age?[/p][/quote]Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats. You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /david-cameron/97977 53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C ameron-renews-scrap- with-Lib-Dem-over-bo undary-changes.html They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats. Never. Trust. A. Tory.[/p][/quote]It does pale a bit in comparison with Labour's back door immigration policy. The ultimate in gerrymandering. It was/is unsustainable/unnaff ordable as were their policies on borrowing, benefits, war, putting the UK at the heart of the EU (did someone mention cutting the numbers of our representatives?). This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class. Alekhine

1:32pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

Alekhine says:
"This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class."

Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay?
Alekhine says: "This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class." Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay? Devils Advocate

1:38pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise?

The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not.
Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government?
Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise? The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not. Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government? Devils Advocate

3:27pm Wed 16 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
Alekhine says:
"This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class."

Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay?
you can't palm those bankers off on the right wing i'm afraid. victor blank, eric daniels and the rbs weasel were all mates of gordon bust. the usa has zero to do with how uk bankers brought the uk economy to it's knees with the blessing of gordon and tony and more banker knighthoods than you could shake a stick at
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: Alekhine says: "This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class." Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay?[/p][/quote]you can't palm those bankers off on the right wing i'm afraid. victor blank, eric daniels and the rbs weasel were all mates of gordon bust. the usa has zero to do with how uk bankers brought the uk economy to it's knees with the blessing of gordon and tony and more banker knighthoods than you could shake a stick at asbo. just the truth

3:31pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Alekhine says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise? The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not. Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government?
MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector - simple.

Devils Advocate says

Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay?

--

GB made the decision to axe tax relief on dividends paid to pension funds as chancellor in 1997. Yes, it does affect pensioners and people from all walks from your imagined ladded (i don't have a ladder).

While it is always popular with Labour to hang a banker, the banking crisis happened in 2008.

Is your nose working yet?
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise? The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not. Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government?[/p][/quote]MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector - simple. Devils Advocate says Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay? -- GB made the decision to axe tax relief on dividends paid to pension funds as chancellor in 1997. Yes, it does affect pensioners and people from all walks from your imagined ladded (i don't have a ladder). While it is always popular with Labour to hang a banker, the banking crisis happened in 2008. Is your nose working yet? Alekhine

3:57pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Lastlaugh... says...

MPs Pay rise? Sure why not?

They will only steal it another way if obstructed.
MPs Pay rise? Sure why not? They will only steal it another way if obstructed. Lastlaugh...

4:23pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

Alekhine wrote:
Devils Advocate wrote:
Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise? The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not. Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government?
MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector - simple.

Devils Advocate says

Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay?

--

GB made the decision to axe tax relief on dividends paid to pension funds as chancellor in 1997. Yes, it does affect pensioners and people from all walks from your imagined ladded (i don't have a ladder).

While it is always popular with Labour to hang a banker, the banking crisis happened in 2008.

Is your nose working yet?
It would do a lot of people some good, perhaps, if they were to look at news that is not written or modified by the British press. America still admits to the crisis, and the knock on effects that it had in Europe (including the UK) so if it is good enough for one of the proudest of nations in the world to admit to damage here, why has it to be NEW Labour (However far right that leadership was.) As for the ladder, that was because of the perceived "middle class" problem with pensions that I replied to, as if ordinary everyday working people were not affected.(I felt bad for the Mirror group workforce as well.)
Thanks for the concern with my nose. It must be awry, as I seem to keep coming up smelling of roses! :)
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise? The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not. Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government?[/p][/quote]MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector - simple. Devils Advocate says Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay? -- GB made the decision to axe tax relief on dividends paid to pension funds as chancellor in 1997. Yes, it does affect pensioners and people from all walks from your imagined ladded (i don't have a ladder). While it is always popular with Labour to hang a banker, the banking crisis happened in 2008. Is your nose working yet?[/p][/quote]It would do a lot of people some good, perhaps, if they were to look at news that is not written or modified by the British press. America still admits to the crisis, and the knock on effects that it had in Europe (including the UK) so if it is good enough for one of the proudest of nations in the world to admit to damage here, why has it to be NEW Labour (However far right that leadership was.) As for the ladder, that was because of the perceived "middle class" problem with pensions that I replied to, as if ordinary everyday working people were not affected.(I felt bad for the Mirror group workforce as well.) Thanks for the concern with my nose. It must be awry, as I seem to keep coming up smelling of roses! :) Devils Advocate

4:26pm Wed 16 Jan 13

JessyJar says...

do they deserve a pay rise? No.
how about a pay cut..

ridiculous.
do they deserve a pay rise? No. how about a pay cut.. ridiculous. JessyJar

5:40pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Alekhine says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
Alekhine wrote:
Devils Advocate wrote: Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise? The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not. Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government?
MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector - simple. Devils Advocate says Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay? -- GB made the decision to axe tax relief on dividends paid to pension funds as chancellor in 1997. Yes, it does affect pensioners and people from all walks from your imagined ladded (i don't have a ladder). While it is always popular with Labour to hang a banker, the banking crisis happened in 2008. Is your nose working yet?
It would do a lot of people some good, perhaps, if they were to look at news that is not written or modified by the British press. America still admits to the crisis, and the knock on effects that it had in Europe (including the UK) so if it is good enough for one of the proudest of nations in the world to admit to damage here, why has it to be NEW Labour (However far right that leadership was.) As for the ladder, that was because of the perceived "middle class" problem with pensions that I replied to, as if ordinary everyday working people were not affected.(I felt bad for the Mirror group workforce as well.) Thanks for the concern with my nose. It must be awry, as I seem to keep coming up smelling of roses! :)
Thats not good, we put manure on our roses.

Why is there a "middle class" problem? The middle class are just ordinary workers who don't wear cloth caps. Why should their pensions be robbed by the self-proclaimed champions of ordinary people. Oh-its because NEW Labour were too right wing! - that makes me laugh but its not very funny.
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: Anyway,how does any of that equate with anything to do with MP's getting a rise? The point is we are all in this together, except those who are well off, who are not. Does that exposure of what is really happening have anything to do with the last Government. Or even Thatcher's Government?[/p][/quote]MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector - simple. Devils Advocate says Really? And the pensioners of the rest of the hard-working people? Or does that not matter? Just because Labour was led into a trap where they, via the right-wing and it's press, are to be blamed for the problem that was caused by the USA's gamblers, and led into more trouble by the right-wing bankers of the UK, you think it right that the working people "lower down" your imagined ladder should be made to pay? -- GB made the decision to axe tax relief on dividends paid to pension funds as chancellor in 1997. Yes, it does affect pensioners and people from all walks from your imagined ladded (i don't have a ladder). While it is always popular with Labour to hang a banker, the banking crisis happened in 2008. Is your nose working yet?[/p][/quote]It would do a lot of people some good, perhaps, if they were to look at news that is not written or modified by the British press. America still admits to the crisis, and the knock on effects that it had in Europe (including the UK) so if it is good enough for one of the proudest of nations in the world to admit to damage here, why has it to be NEW Labour (However far right that leadership was.) As for the ladder, that was because of the perceived "middle class" problem with pensions that I replied to, as if ordinary everyday working people were not affected.(I felt bad for the Mirror group workforce as well.) Thanks for the concern with my nose. It must be awry, as I seem to keep coming up smelling of roses! :)[/p][/quote]Thats not good, we put manure on our roses. Why is there a "middle class" problem? The middle class are just ordinary workers who don't wear cloth caps. Why should their pensions be robbed by the self-proclaimed champions of ordinary people. Oh-its because NEW Labour were too right wing! - that makes me laugh but its not very funny. Alekhine

6:46pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

Alekhine says:
"Why is there a "middle class" problem? The middle class are just ordinary workers who don't wear cloth caps. Why should their pensions be robbed by the self-proclaimed champions of ordinary people."
Without wishing for a protracted discussion going further and further off point, I was wondering why you brought up the supposed actions of Gordon Brown when the current concerns are what this government is doing to the pensions of the lower classes right now, and of course whether parliament is allowed to go for inflation busting rises at this time.

I do believe that NEW Labour has lost touch with it's core supporters, the very supporters who created the Labour movement. They did nothing to repair the damage done by Thatcher, they did not honour the original promise of the newly formed party over a century ago, and for that reason alone I call them right wing. Bearing in mind your party disallowed working people the vote for many years, lost below the publicity of "Votes for women" as it was!
But, the majority of working people still have loyalty to their own party, as repeated polls prove.
Alekhine says: "Why is there a "middle class" problem? The middle class are just ordinary workers who don't wear cloth caps. Why should their pensions be robbed by the self-proclaimed champions of ordinary people." Without wishing for a protracted discussion going further and further off point, I was wondering why you brought up the supposed actions of Gordon Brown when the current concerns are what this government is doing to the pensions of the lower classes right now, and of course whether parliament is allowed to go for inflation busting rises at this time. I do believe that NEW Labour has lost touch with it's core supporters, the very supporters who created the Labour movement. They did nothing to repair the damage done by Thatcher, they did not honour the original promise of the newly formed party over a century ago, and for that reason alone I call them right wing. Bearing in mind your party disallowed working people the vote for many years, lost below the publicity of "Votes for women" as it was! But, the majority of working people still have loyalty to their own party, as repeated polls prove. Devils Advocate

7:34pm Wed 16 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
Alekhine says:
"Why is there a "middle class" problem? The middle class are just ordinary workers who don't wear cloth caps. Why should their pensions be robbed by the self-proclaimed champions of ordinary people."
Without wishing for a protracted discussion going further and further off point, I was wondering why you brought up the supposed actions of Gordon Brown when the current concerns are what this government is doing to the pensions of the lower classes right now, and of course whether parliament is allowed to go for inflation busting rises at this time.

I do believe that NEW Labour has lost touch with it's core supporters, the very supporters who created the Labour movement. They did nothing to repair the damage done by Thatcher, they did not honour the original promise of the newly formed party over a century ago, and for that reason alone I call them right wing. Bearing in mind your party disallowed working people the vote for many years, lost below the publicity of "Votes for women" as it was!
But, the majority of working people still have loyalty to their own party, as repeated polls prove.
mp's salaries are a cross party issue.
when it comes to snouts in the trough the labour mp's are as culpable as anyone else if a little less able to face up to their crimes (margaret moran and her ernest saunders-esque mental issues springs to mind)
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: Alekhine says: "Why is there a "middle class" problem? The middle class are just ordinary workers who don't wear cloth caps. Why should their pensions be robbed by the self-proclaimed champions of ordinary people." Without wishing for a protracted discussion going further and further off point, I was wondering why you brought up the supposed actions of Gordon Brown when the current concerns are what this government is doing to the pensions of the lower classes right now, and of course whether parliament is allowed to go for inflation busting rises at this time. I do believe that NEW Labour has lost touch with it's core supporters, the very supporters who created the Labour movement. They did nothing to repair the damage done by Thatcher, they did not honour the original promise of the newly formed party over a century ago, and for that reason alone I call them right wing. Bearing in mind your party disallowed working people the vote for many years, lost below the publicity of "Votes for women" as it was! But, the majority of working people still have loyalty to their own party, as repeated polls prove.[/p][/quote]mp's salaries are a cross party issue. when it comes to snouts in the trough the labour mp's are as culpable as anyone else if a little less able to face up to their crimes (margaret moran and her ernest saunders-esque mental issues springs to mind) asbo. just the truth

7:57pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

That poor woman. But of course 3 labour Mp's hit the headlines for expenses fiddling, whilst 1 tory peer sat quietly in the shadows as the right-wing began their putting down of the party they had not agreed to win the election. But, about the postal votes of dead people......

If the vote for "Human rights" goes through, what then of the feckless ones? where will they stand? Or, like parliament and the sale of goods act, will it not apply to MP's?
That poor woman. But of course 3 labour Mp's hit the headlines for expenses fiddling, whilst 1 tory peer sat quietly in the shadows as the right-wing began their putting down of the party they had not agreed to win the election. But, about the postal votes of dead people...... If the vote for "Human rights" goes through, what then of the feckless ones? where will they stand? Or, like parliament and the sale of goods act, will it not apply to MP's? Devils Advocate

8:56pm Wed 16 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

Devils Advocate wrote:
That poor woman. But of course 3 labour Mp's hit the headlines for expenses fiddling, whilst 1 tory peer sat quietly in the shadows as the right-wing began their putting down of the party they had not agreed to win the election. But, about the postal votes of dead people......

If the vote for "Human rights" goes through, what then of the feckless ones? where will they stand? Or, like parliament and the sale of goods act, will it not apply to MP's?
i'm hoping "that poor woman" was ironic. postal votes for dead people was an isolated incident and as previously stated occurred some time back in the bronze age
[quote][p][bold]Devils Advocate[/bold] wrote: That poor woman. But of course 3 labour Mp's hit the headlines for expenses fiddling, whilst 1 tory peer sat quietly in the shadows as the right-wing began their putting down of the party they had not agreed to win the election. But, about the postal votes of dead people...... If the vote for "Human rights" goes through, what then of the feckless ones? where will they stand? Or, like parliament and the sale of goods act, will it not apply to MP's?[/p][/quote]i'm hoping "that poor woman" was ironic. postal votes for dead people was an isolated incident and as previously stated occurred some time back in the bronze age asbo. just the truth

9:46pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

I'm beginning to feel like Gordon must have when you lot unleashed the dogs of war on him. Yes that was just the lightest touch of irony. Isolated incident? 911 was an isolated incident as well. How is the vote to abolish human rights coming on by the way? Another little effort to get rid of some stupid rules? we'll see.
Incidentally, I do not belong to any political party, they wouldn't have me!
I'm beginning to feel like Gordon must have when you lot unleashed the dogs of war on him. Yes that was just the lightest touch of irony. Isolated incident? 911 was an isolated incident as well. How is the vote to abolish human rights coming on by the way? Another little effort to get rid of some stupid rules? we'll see. Incidentally, I do not belong to any political party, they wouldn't have me! Devils Advocate

9:52pm Wed 16 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

bust by name, bust by nature.
bust by name, bust by nature. asbo. just the truth

10:02pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Devils Advocate says...

asbo. just the truth wrote:
bust by name, bust by nature.
Er.... Jayne Mansfield?
[quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: bust by name, bust by nature.[/p][/quote]Er.... Jayne Mansfield? Devils Advocate

12:39pm Thu 17 Jan 13

Alekhine says...

I have already said that MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector. i.e salaries are frozen.

Can you be a bit more specific with the currect concerns about changes to the state pension? I have not studied this but, In general terms, people are living longer.

The reason i brought up GBs pension raid was because 1997 was a boom year and there did not seem to be any reason to remove tax relief from employer conribution to employee pensions. It is possible that the government viewed it as just another corporate tax avoidance scheme. i.e it was politically motivated and i was not wearing my cloth cap. I wonder where the money went?

It looks like the LibDems missed a trick in not rebranding before forming government. Expect to see them as the Liberal party after the next election.

I would ask my father about votes for women but he's dead.
I have already said that MPs should live within their own rules for the public sector. i.e salaries are frozen. Can you be a bit more specific with the currect concerns about changes to the state pension? I have not studied this but, In general terms, people are living longer. The reason i brought up GBs pension raid was because 1997 was a boom year and there did not seem to be any reason to remove tax relief from employer conribution to employee pensions. It is possible that the government viewed it as just another corporate tax avoidance scheme. i.e it was politically motivated and i was not wearing my cloth cap. I wonder where the money went? It looks like the LibDems missed a trick in not rebranding before forming government. Expect to see them as the Liberal party after the next election. I would ask my father about votes for women but he's dead. Alekhine

4:35pm Fri 18 Jan 13

Shoebury_Cyclist says...

Alekhine wrote:
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
asbo. just the truth wrote:
woolstone wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!!
no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1
Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?
so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering " sometime back in the bronze age?
Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats. You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /david-cameron/97977 53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C ameron-renews-scrap- with-Lib-Dem-over-bo undary-changes.html They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats. Never. Trust. A. Tory.
It does pale a bit in comparison with Labour's back door immigration policy. The ultimate in gerrymandering.

It was/is unsustainable/unnaff

ordable as were their policies on borrowing, benefits, war, putting the UK at the heart of the EU (did someone mention cutting the numbers of our representatives?). This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class.
Don't believe the hype. When the credit crisis hit the UK had the second lowest debt of all the G7 countries. Not only that but the tories are lying about the national debt, it HAS been much higher in the past. They are simply using it as an excuse to push forward their anti-social ideologies.

I suggest you read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. It's a real education. The tactics uncovered in it, proposed decades ago by Milton Friedman, could be a blueprint for current tory policy.
[quote][p][bold]Alekhine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoebury_Cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asbo. just the truth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolstone[/bold] wrote: Well they have cut back on police, teachers. nurses etc., when can we cut back on MPs, do we really need so many ? How about a pay cut like most other public workers, after all we are all in this together!!!!![/p][/quote]no but we could never re-draw the electoral boundaries to shrink the numbers because the gerrymanderers oops i meant labour and nicky clogg would never sanction it. let's just call it looking after number 1[/p][/quote]Shirley Porter was guilty of gerrymandering. What political stripe was she?[/p][/quote]so let's just be clear about this. you support widescreen anamorphic labour gerrymandering but oppose an isolated incidence of conservative "gerrymandering " sometime back in the bronze age?[/p][/quote]Recently Cameron got pi**ed off with Clegg because Clegg refused to back Cameron's gerrymandering boundary changes which would have created 20 more conservative seats. You want to see this country's gerrymanderers look at the tories: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /david-cameron/97977 53/PIC-AND-PUBLISH-C ameron-renews-scrap- with-Lib-Dem-over-bo undary-changes.html They know they're going to get wiped out in 2015 so the tories are attempting every dirty trick in the book to secure more seats. Never. Trust. A. Tory.[/p][/quote]It does pale a bit in comparison with Labour's back door immigration policy. The ultimate in gerrymandering. It was/is unsustainable/unnaff ordable as were their policies on borrowing, benefits, war, putting the UK at the heart of the EU (did someone mention cutting the numbers of our representatives?). This is why McDoom plundered the pensions of the middle class.[/p][/quote]Don't believe the hype. When the credit crisis hit the UK had the second lowest debt of all the G7 countries. Not only that but the tories are lying about the national debt, it HAS been much higher in the past. They are simply using it as an excuse to push forward their anti-social ideologies. I suggest you read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. It's a real education. The tactics uncovered in it, proposed decades ago by Milton Friedman, could be a blueprint for current tory policy. Shoebury_Cyclist

12:47pm Sat 19 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

the spin doctors are doing triple pike with tuck (tariff 3.0) in their graves. what you're saying in other words is we had the biggest bubble until it popped. great.
the spin doctors are doing triple pike with tuck (tariff 3.0) in their graves. what you're saying in other words is we had the biggest bubble until it popped. great. asbo. just the truth

12:56pm Sat 19 Jan 13

asbo. just the truth says...

tony boom and gordon bust. oh the irony. they weren't describing their opponents - they were predicting their futures
tony boom and gordon bust. oh the irony. they weren't describing their opponents - they were predicting their futures asbo. just the truth

4:16pm Sat 19 Jan 13

jolllyboy says...

Greed, greed and more greed. Freeze their opay or cut it like they are cutting money to pensioners whose income is less than they get for their meals. They do not even reply to many constituents enquiries either, they are mostly self serving top heavy members of govt.
Greed, greed and more greed. Freeze their opay or cut it like they are cutting money to pensioners whose income is less than they get for their meals. They do not even reply to many constituents enquiries either, they are mostly self serving top heavy members of govt. jolllyboy

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree