news & politics:discussion

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

What policy did Sam Tarry make up by the way? 

He made up policy of workers pay/inflation and gave himself the title of Secretary of State. He broke collective responsibility so had to be sacked.

Rachel Reeves didn’t do any of that. 

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

He made up policy of workers pay/inflation and gave himself the title of Secretary of State. He broke collective responsibility so had to be sacked.

Rachel Reeves didn’t do any of that. 

and he wore a pink shirt tucked into his too tight jeans.

[mattiloy]

26 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

workers should be offered pay rises in line with inflation

 

21 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

He made up policy of workers pay/inflation and gave himself the title of Secretary of State. He broke collective responsibility so had to be sacked.

Rachel Reeves didn’t do any of that. 

 

I’ve watched the interview a couple of times but can’t find the bit where he states that its Labour policy.

As far as I can tell the nearest he comes is in saying ’i’m sure any Labour MP and Labour member will feel solidarity with these striking workers’

 

Edited August 1, 2022 by mattiloy

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

 

 

I’ve watched the interview a couple of times but can’t find the bit where he states that its Labour policy.

As far as I can tell the nearest he comes is in saying ’i’m sure any Labour MP and Labour member will feel solidarity with these striking workers’

 

He's not allowed personal opinions. Collectivism.

[steviewevie]

 

[Guest]

At one point he said he was ‘there as a shadow transport minister’ then went to to say ‘every worker deserves a pay rise that is in line with inflation’.

He broke collective responsibility so had to be sacked.

I’m not sure why some seemingly want Rachel Reeves to be sacked. 

[mattiloy]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

He's not allowed personal opinions. Collectivism.

Then neither is Reeves. Inconsistency.

[mattiloy]

1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

At one point he said he was ‘there as a shadow transport minister’ then went to to say ‘every worker deserves a pay rise that is in line with inflation’.

He broke collective responsibility so had to be sacked.

I’m not sure why some seemingly want Rachel Reeves to be sacked. 

He was shadow minister for local transport and buses. Its not really that much of a stretch.

I’ve watched it again, he does not say ’every worker deserves a pay that is in line with inflation’.

The truth is he never mentions Labour policy once let alone lie about it. Reeves did and didn’t get sacked. He merely expresses an opinion.

Just more double standards, hypocrisy, lies from the Labour party high command.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

He was shadow minister for local transport and buses. Its not really that much of a stretch.

I’ve watched it again, he does not say ’every worker deserves a pay that is in line with inflation’.

The truth is he never mentions Labour policy once let alone lie about it. Reeves did and didn’t get sacked. He merely expresses an opinion.

Just more double standards, hypocrisy, lies from the Labour party high command.

No Rachel Reeves doesn’t. She got something wrong, people are allowed to do that. Sam Tarry made up policy and broke collective responsibility. 

Just admit this is part of your massive anti-Starmer agenda and bias. 

[steviewevie]

30 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Then neither is Reeves. Inconsistency.

was it a personal opinion, or did she just make a mistake, or did she accidently let the cat out of the bag? Confusion.

[steviewevie]

25 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

He was shadow minister for local transport and buses. Its not really that much of a stretch.

I’ve watched it again, he does not say ’every worker deserves a pay that is in line with inflation’.

The truth is he never mentions Labour policy once let alone lie about it. Reeves did and didn’t get sacked. He merely expresses an opinion.

Just more double standards, hypocrisy, lies from the Labour party high command.

I mean...he's not going sack Reeves is he.

But is going to sack that pesky trot in a pink shirt.

[mattiloy]

4 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

No Rachel Reeves doesn’t. She got something wrong, people are allowed to do that. Sam Tarry made up policy and broke collective responsibility. 

Just admit this is part of your massive anti-Starmer agenda and bias. 

 

The only agenda I have is the truth. A concept seemingly alien to Starmerites.

[steviewevie]

6 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

 

The only agenda I have is the truth. A concept seemingly alien to Starmerites.

yada yada

[Guest]

1 minute ago, mattiloy said:

 

The only agenda I have is the truth. A concept seemingly alien to Starmerites.

Lol. That is basically code for you are completely full of crap.

Were you telling the truth when you said you were done with this thread a few months back (I believe you said something like ‘over and out’).

[mattiloy]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

was it a personal opinion, or did she just make a mistake, or did she accidently let the cat out of the bag? Confusion.

Honestly it seems like both her and Lou Haigh just made up whatever policy they thought sounded right because the truth is that Starmer’s Labour is a policy vacuum. As such, Reeves went no to nationalisation and Haigh went yes in separate interviews last monday. So at least one of them, probably both of them, have made up policy Where there wasn’t an agreed position.

Then Starmer seemed to side with Reeves in an interview saying that nationalisation is not necessary, budget constraints etc. Then I think in the end he U turned on that and said, actually rail nationalisation we might think about.

It was real the thick of it stuff.

[mattiloy]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Lol. That is basically code for you are completely full of crap.

Were you telling the truth when you said you were done with this thread a few months back (I believe you said something like ‘over and out’).

Seems like I’ve hit a nerve. Might be time for you to log off mate. Go and have yourself a cup of Tea, sit out in the garden, relax

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Seems like I’ve hit a nerve. Might be time for you to log off mate. Go and have yourself a cup of Tea, sit out in the garden, relax

Why can’t you answer that question? If your agenda really is the truth you’d want to sort out this discrepancy (you won’t because what you’ve said is a load of rubbish).

You are the one getting very angry about a politician in a country that you don’t live in and has no impact on your life.  

Edited August 1, 2022 by Ozanne

[steviewevie]

no, you log off... no, you log off...

[mattiloy]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

Why can’t you answer that question? If your agenda really is the truth you’d want to sort out this discrepancy (you won’t because what you’ve said is a load of rubbish).

You are the one getting very angry about a politician in a country that you don’t live in and has no impact on your life.  

 

😭😭😭

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

 

😭😭😭

You gonna answer my question or just be a child?

[Crazyfool01]

Does it matter that someone says they are done with a thread and returns ? Sometimes it’s nice to have a break from arguments ? Surely that’s something we can agree on ? Or not 😀

[fraybentos1]

17 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

Does it matter that someone says they are done with a thread and returns ? Sometimes it’s nice to have a break from arguments ? Surely that’s something we can agree on ? Or not 😀

Ozanne is supreme leader of this thread did you not know?

Apparently you’re also banned from talking U.K. politics if not living in the U.K. at the moment 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

Does it matter that someone says they are done with a thread and returns ? Sometimes it’s nice to have a break from arguments ? Surely that’s something we can agree on ? Or not 😀

I think what people say matters or at least should do especially if they claim to be all about truth.

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I think what people say matters or at least should do especially if they claim to be all about truth.

Ah come on be fair I’ve dipped out of this thread at times and returned because it got a bit aggy … I don’t always agree with comments of matilloy but surely it’s reasonable that people come and go when they want 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

Ah come on be fair I’ve dipped out of this thread at times and returned because it got a bit aggy … I don’t always agree with comments of matilloy but surely it’s reasonable that people come and go when they want 

I disagree in this instance, if someone claims to be done then comes back and talks down to people they deserve to be asked why they’ve gone back on their word.