Re: Stop voting for fucking Tories
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 6:04 pm
The elements that means this issue keeps returning are:Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:29 pm I get the feeling that some in the Home Office will only be happy when no one has a right to live here, irrespective of where they were born.
No. We were going to have some but it turned out some fucker had stolen all the commas and they had to cut it short.fishfoodie wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:49 pmHe has all the necessary requirements to work for GB News, as he's a despicable, immoral,, bigoted cunt.dpedin wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:54 pm https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64409947
Good God!
Does the UK not have any legislation for, "Equal Time", when media outlets, give Politicians a platform ?
... this one might actually workAndrew Bridgen is threatening to sue fellow MP Matt Hancock after the former health secretary accused him on Twitter of "antisemitic, anti-vax, anti-scientific conspiracy theories".
Mr Bridgen was suspended as a Tory MP over a tweet likening the impact of Covid vaccines to the Holocaust.
A letter sent on his behalf is claiming £100,000 in libel damages.
Mr Hancock - who had the Tory whip removed for his reality TV appearance - is standing by his comments.
Is that Andrew Bridgen who a judge said lied in court under oath, who lost the case against his family re running of the family potato business, who used his MP position to ask police to investigate his brother about some made up crime, a Brexit Spartan who thought any UK citizen was entitled to a RoI passport, who breached HoC MPs Code of Conduct and was suspended for 5 days, who was expelled from the Tory party for comparing covid vaccinations to the Holocaust and who was evicted from the family business home he and his second wife, a Serbian Opera singer lived in and had to pay £800k costs? If it is then I suspect creepy Hancock won't be all that worried!JM2K6 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 6:26 pm In further "Matt Hancock doing whatever he can to win public support" news:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64414637
... this one might actually workAndrew Bridgen is threatening to sue fellow MP Matt Hancock after the former health secretary accused him on Twitter of "antisemitic, anti-vax, anti-scientific conspiracy theories".
Mr Bridgen was suspended as a Tory MP over a tweet likening the impact of Covid vaccines to the Holocaust.
A letter sent on his behalf is claiming £100,000 in libel damages.
Mr Hancock - who had the Tory whip removed for his reality TV appearance - is standing by his comments.
I gave up listening to the conceited cunt.dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:59 am Just listening to Hunt the Cunt make his speech on Radio 5. He is like a Headmaster making the welcome speech to new pupils - the 4 Es. Utter shite! However he has explained that the UK is ploughing headlong into creating the Sovereign Individual free for all that his Tufton Street mates, JRM etc have been wetting their pants over. Reducing constraints on banks looks like a recipe for Bank Crash.2 and the desire to reduce taxes by reducing spending is code for getting rid of public services. Full of buzzwords and taking advantage of 'Brexit Freedoms' - shite!1
Should haave scrapped the whole thing years ago
I agree. We don't "need it", but we desperately needed Govt to spend on Big Infrastructure Projects and this one gave them cold feet on all the others in the pipeline - so they didn't start any except Cross-Rail. Wankers.
Hey, things are only bad because other politicians and the media say it's bad! It'll be great!dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:59 am Just listening to Hunt the Cunt make his speech on Radio 5. He is like a Headmaster making the welcome speech to new pupils - the 4 Es. Utter shite! However he has explained that the UK is ploughing headlong into creating the Sovereign Individual free for all that his Tufton Street mates, JRM etc have been wetting their pants over. Reducing constraints on banks looks like a recipe for Bank Crash.2 and the desire to reduce taxes by reducing spending is code for getting rid of public services. Full of buzzwords and taking advantage of 'Brexit Freedoms' - shite!1
tabascoboy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:31 amHey, things are only bad because other politicians and the media say it's bad! It'll be great!dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:59 am Just listening to Hunt the Cunt make his speech on Radio 5. He is like a Headmaster making the welcome speech to new pupils - the 4 Es. Utter shite! However he has explained that the UK is ploughing headlong into creating the Sovereign Individual free for all that his Tufton Street mates, JRM etc have been wetting their pants over. Reducing constraints on banks looks like a recipe for Bank Crash.2 and the desire to reduce taxes by reducing spending is code for getting rid of public services. Full of buzzwords and taking advantage of 'Brexit Freedoms' - shite!1
This is all true, though I’d point out that speed isn’t the central benefit of the new line compared to capacity. 2 hrs basically bang on to Manchester is a pretty fast track by any measure, the issue is running these trains on the WCML buggers up all local services_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:45 am During the madness of Truss there were Tories saying they wanted to axe HS2 to balance the books and enable Trussonomics to happen. I posted it on the thread. Not surprising they want to cut costs by scaling it back. Dumb move, negates a lot of the point travelling to outer London then getting a bus/tube to central London, half the journey time could end up being the travel within London, meaning it's not high speed. There must be a danger of a regular train into central London being about as fast.
It really is incredible we're still talking about EU red tape. Every single Tory voter is just an idiot, no redeeming factor to buying that stupidity. Fortunately there are fewer these days.tabascoboy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:31 amHey, things are only bad because other politicians and the media say it's bad! It'll be great!dpedin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:59 am Just listening to Hunt the Cunt make his speech on Radio 5. He is like a Headmaster making the welcome speech to new pupils - the 4 Es. Utter shite! However he has explained that the UK is ploughing headlong into creating the Sovereign Individual free for all that his Tufton Street mates, JRM etc have been wetting their pants over. Reducing constraints on banks looks like a recipe for Bank Crash.2 and the desire to reduce taxes by reducing spending is code for getting rid of public services. Full of buzzwords and taking advantage of 'Brexit Freedoms' - shite!1
Interesting, so I guess the question becomes what does lots (what volumes are we looking at?) of new people popping up in a confined part of zone 2/3 during rush hour do to London's transport network, hard to imagine Central/Piccadilly/District all being more rammed, hopefully most use the Elizabeth line.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:51 amThis is all true, though I’d point out that speed isn’t the central benefit of the new line compared to capacity. 2 hrs basically bang on to Manchester is a pretty fast track by any measure, the issue is running these trains on the WCML buggers up all local services_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:45 am During the madness of Truss there were Tories saying they wanted to axe HS2 to balance the books and enable Trussonomics to happen. I posted it on the thread. Not surprising they want to cut costs by scaling it back. Dumb move, negates a lot of the point travelling to outer London then getting a bus/tube to central London, half the journey time could end up being the travel within London, meaning it's not high speed. There must be a danger of a regular train into central London being about as fast.
Probably do the old "Eurostar in Waterloo" thing - high speed HS2 lines until Willesden, then slow down on existing tracks into *insert existing Zone 1 station here*_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 11:34 amInteresting, so I guess the question becomes what does lots (what volumes are we looking at?) of new people popping up in a confined part of zone 2/3 during rush hour do to London's transport network, hard to imagine Central/Piccadilly/District all being more rammed, hopefully most use the Elizabeth line.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:51 amThis is all true, though I’d point out that speed isn’t the central benefit of the new line compared to capacity. 2 hrs basically bang on to Manchester is a pretty fast track by any measure, the issue is running these trains on the WCML buggers up all local services_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:45 am During the madness of Truss there were Tories saying they wanted to axe HS2 to balance the books and enable Trussonomics to happen. I posted it on the thread. Not surprising they want to cut costs by scaling it back. Dumb move, negates a lot of the point travelling to outer London then getting a bus/tube to central London, half the journey time could end up being the travel within London, meaning it's not high speed. There must be a danger of a regular train into central London being about as fast.
Sandstorm is correct I would imagine, though the two main line stations with a feasible link to OOC (Paddington and Marylebone) aren’t oozing spare capacity._Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 11:34 amInteresting, so I guess the question becomes what does lots (what volumes are we looking at?) of new people popping up in a confined part of zone 2/3 during rush hour do to London's transport network, hard to imagine Central/Piccadilly/District all being more rammed, hopefully most use the Elizabeth line.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:51 amThis is all true, though I’d point out that speed isn’t the central benefit of the new line compared to capacity. 2 hrs basically bang on to Manchester is a pretty fast track by any measure, the issue is running these trains on the WCML buggers up all local services_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:45 am During the madness of Truss there were Tories saying they wanted to axe HS2 to balance the books and enable Trussonomics to happen. I posted it on the thread. Not surprising they want to cut costs by scaling it back. Dumb move, negates a lot of the point travelling to outer London then getting a bus/tube to central London, half the journey time could end up being the travel within London, meaning it's not high speed. There must be a danger of a regular train into central London being about as fast.
There's HS trains and HS trains though. It's debatable whether the 300km/hr + TGV speeds are necessary in the relatively short London to Manchester run, and 200km/hr trains can easily be achieved by more simple track upgrading, signalling and electrification (if not already done). If the existing track way allows it, doubling, or even an extra single line of tracks can be enough to allow mixing of local and the lower HS trains. And at a much, much cheaper cost.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:51 amThis is all true, though I’d point out that speed isn’t the central benefit of the new line compared to capacity. 2 hrs basically bang on to Manchester is a pretty fast track by any measure, the issue is running these trains on the WCML buggers up all local services_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:45 am During the madness of Truss there were Tories saying they wanted to axe HS2 to balance the books and enable Trussonomics to happen. I posted it on the thread. Not surprising they want to cut costs by scaling it back. Dumb move, negates a lot of the point travelling to outer London then getting a bus/tube to central London, half the journey time could end up being the travel within London, meaning it's not high speed. There must be a danger of a regular train into central London being about as fast.
This seems not as bad as I imagined. Still wondering what the actual "saving" is though.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 11:58 am Sandstorm is correct I would imagine, though the two main line stations with a feasible link to OOC (Paddington and Marylebone) aren’t oozing spare capacity.
Completely agree on the speed element. 225mph (the current proposed running speed) seems like the easiest thing to reduce on this project as you say. For me I'd probably have just built a regular 125mph railway with stops only in the cities, the ECML has show just how fast a track that can create even with stopping services.Camroc2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:02 pmThere's HS trains and HS trains though. It's debatable whether the 300km/hr + TGV speeds are necessary in the relatively short London to Manchester run, and 200km/hr trains can easily be achieved by more simple track upgrading, signalling and electrification (if not already done). If the existing track way allows it, doubling, or even an extra single line of tracks can be enough to allow mixing of local and the lower HS trains. And at a much, much cheaper cost.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:51 amThis is all true, though I’d point out that speed isn’t the central benefit of the new line compared to capacity. 2 hrs basically bang on to Manchester is a pretty fast track by any measure, the issue is running these trains on the WCML buggers up all local services_Os_ wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:45 am During the madness of Truss there were Tories saying they wanted to axe HS2 to balance the books and enable Trussonomics to happen. I posted it on the thread. Not surprising they want to cut costs by scaling it back. Dumb move, negates a lot of the point travelling to outer London then getting a bus/tube to central London, half the journey time could end up being the travel within London, meaning it's not high speed. There must be a danger of a regular train into central London being about as fast.
FWIW I'm pretty sure that with modern signalling trains running at 200 kph can safely mix with slower traffic up to a point. But as you say, I am not familiar with either the west coast line, nor its usage.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:16 pmCompletely agree on the speed element. 225mph (the current proposed running speed) seems like the easiest thing to reduce on this project as you say. For me I'd probably have just built a regular 125mph railway with stops only in the cities, the ECML has show just how fast a track that can create even with stopping services.Camroc2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:02 pmThere's HS trains and HS trains though. It's debatable whether the 300km/hr + TGV speeds are necessary in the relatively short London to Manchester run, and 200km/hr trains can easily be achieved by more simple track upgrading, signalling and electrification (if not already done). If the existing track way allows it, doubling, or even an extra single line of tracks can be enough to allow mixing of local and the lower HS trains. And at a much, much cheaper cost.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 10:51 am
This is all true, though I’d point out that speed isn’t the central benefit of the new line compared to capacity. 2 hrs basically bang on to Manchester is a pretty fast track by any measure, the issue is running these trains on the WCML buggers up all local services
As to doubling existing lines, the WCML (the one HS2 is really trying to alleviate pressure on) underwent a major upgrade c.2010 (exact date escapes me). This was expensive, massively disruptive and is already at capacity again.
No reason you will have done but if you trace the WCML on google maps you can see there is no natural space for doubling and it runs through built up areas and industrial estates for huge swathes of the journey. Essentially, you can add extra tracks there but at a cost where you may as well build a new railway.
The issue with HS2, among others, is that it is wildly overspecced. The speed is the first element (which mandates being rod straight and extra strength bridges etc), tunnelling through cities and large swathes of countryside to appease people who were not appeased was a second, and I could go on. When you look at the scope of the project and what they are required to do, you can easily forget they're trying to build a railway.
With all this said though, if we build it properly it will have significant benefits and like with all infrastructure projects people will get used to it very quickly.
Up to a point I think is right. The challenge with both main lines heading north is that they combine little local railways with the busiest inter-city lines, that are basically at capacity. This means demand is regulated by higher prices and service quality suffers (same as anything running at 95%+ capacity).Camroc2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:33 pmFWIW I'm pretty sure that with modern signalling trains running at 200 kph can safely mix with slower traffic up to a point. But as you say, I am not familiar with either the west coast line, nor its usage.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:16 pmCompletely agree on the speed element. 225mph (the current proposed running speed) seems like the easiest thing to reduce on this project as you say. For me I'd probably have just built a regular 125mph railway with stops only in the cities, the ECML has show just how fast a track that can create even with stopping services.Camroc2 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:02 pm
There's HS trains and HS trains though. It's debatable whether the 300km/hr + TGV speeds are necessary in the relatively short London to Manchester run, and 200km/hr trains can easily be achieved by more simple track upgrading, signalling and electrification (if not already done). If the existing track way allows it, doubling, or even an extra single line of tracks can be enough to allow mixing of local and the lower HS trains. And at a much, much cheaper cost.
As to doubling existing lines, the WCML (the one HS2 is really trying to alleviate pressure on) underwent a major upgrade c.2010 (exact date escapes me). This was expensive, massively disruptive and is already at capacity again.
No reason you will have done but if you trace the WCML on google maps you can see there is no natural space for doubling and it runs through built up areas and industrial estates for huge swathes of the journey. Essentially, you can add extra tracks there but at a cost where you may as well build a new railway.
The issue with HS2, among others, is that it is wildly overspecced. The speed is the first element (which mandates being rod straight and extra strength bridges etc), tunnelling through cities and large swathes of countryside to appease people who were not appeased was a second, and I could go on. When you look at the scope of the project and what they are required to do, you can easily forget they're trying to build a railway.
With all this said though, if we build it properly it will have significant benefits and like with all infrastructure projects people will get used to it very quickly.
My parents (in their 60s) are definitely less conservative now than they were 20 years ago, partly because my brother and I have challenged them on many of their views. They're very Christian by modern standards and are clearly a bit uncomfortable about LGBT stuff, but they're miles from where they used to be saying stuff like "It's just not natural is it?"tabascoboy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:17 pm OMG how horrific for the Tories, us oldies not falling for the guff they spew out...
IoD's chief economist Kitty Usher not impressed eithertabascoboy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:49 pm "Blistering" is overstating it somewhat, but clearly Hunt is thinking all we have to do is "Believe in Britain", ignore the festering pustule of Brexit reality and magically everything will be glorious
But while he referenced the current prime minister’s Mais lecture of a year ago, that opened the door to using the tax system to encourage investment in people, capital and ideas, we heard nothing about how it would be done.
The chancellor himself said today’s speech was “not a series of measures or announcements”. We would therefore add a fifth E for ‘Empty’ to his 4 E’s economic framework.
And of course the hmrc CEO has never lied?????tabascoboy wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:45 pmhttps://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... wi-tax-rowHMRC boss tells MPs ‘innocent errors’ are not penalised amid Zahawi tax row
The crazy thing is that the average age of a Tory MP has remained around 50 years old! They're not Boomers.sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 1:27 pmMy parents (in their 60s) are definitely less conservative now than they were 20 years ago, partly because my brother and I have challenged them on many of their views. They're very Christian by modern standards and are clearly a bit uncomfortable about LGBT stuff, but they're miles from where they used to be saying stuff like "It's just not natural is it?"tabascoboy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 12:17 pm OMG how horrific for the Tories, us oldies not falling for the guff they spew out...
The Tories have done a very good job over the last 12 of backing up everything disparaging we ever said about them while also creating whole new reasons to despise them.
It’s impressive how incredibly badly Rishi has handled it.
Nadhim Zahawi sacked as Tory party chair over tax affairs
Rishi Sunak has sacked the Conservative party chair, Nadhim Zahawi, after he was found to have breached the ministerial code over his tax affairs.
The former chancellor has faced extensive questions in parliament and the media after it emerged he agreed to pay millions to HMRC following a settlement with the tax department.
In a letter to the Tory party chair, Sunak said the ethics adviser, Sir Laurie Magnus, had concluded there was a “serious breach” of the ministerial code. “As a result, I have informed you of my decision to remove you from your position in His Majesty’s Government,” he said.
The prime minister, who had promised “integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level” of his government had been under growing pressure to sack Zahawi from the cabinet, with his judgment coming under question from Tory MPs for reappointing him.
The HMRC investigation into Zahawi began in April 2021, including a meeting with the minister and his advisers in June 2021. Zahawi told the ethics adviser he had “formed the impression” he was simply being asked questions over his tax affairs. But Magnus said Zahawi should have understood he was under serious investigation.
The minister failed to declare the HMRC investigation to the Treasury’s permanent secretary after his appointment as chancellor by Boris Johnson on 5 July 2022. By that stage the investigation had been ongoing for more than a year; however, Zahawi only updated his declaration on 15 July 2022.
Zahawi committed a second breach of the ministerial code by failing to disclose the fact he had paid a penalty for tax avoidance when he was first appointed to Liz Truss’s cabinet last September, and then to Sunak’s in October.
He had reached a settlement with HMRC in August 2022, but it was not until 20 January this year that the details came to light, after the Guardian was told he had paid a penalty imposed by HMRC. He issued a statement the following day, saying the tax office had concluded that he had made a “careless but not deliberate” error.
In his letter to Sunak, the ethics adviser said: “Taken together, I consider that these omissions constitute a serious failure to meet the standards set out in the ministerial code.”
Ha. I was willing to give Sunak half a chance but he did it for me after he reappointed Braverman straight away.