User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#79015
Actual quote from Kemi today.
the rule of law has a purpose, and that is to create a fair system which everybody has treated equally, and where everyone can receive justice.
If you keep creating more regulations and people aren’t getting justice, then something has gone wrong, and we should be able to look at that without assuming that this is a criticism of the entire system of the rule of law.
It means that we should be able to look at how we can reform public law. The law is not above criticism. We should be able to say ‘Actually, this isn’t working, what can we do to improve it’, rather than what is happening now where people say, ‘Oh, it’s the rule of law. We can’t touch it. Let’s not do anything.’
This isn't what "rule of law" means. Incredible that the LOTO thinks it does.

I'm not sure she's going to get those young professionals back, you know.
User avatar
By Andy McDandy
#79017
John Prescott a few years back:
Look I've got my old pledge card a bit battered and crumpled, we said we'd provide more churches teachers and we have. I can remember when people used to say the Japanese are better than us, the Germans are better than us, the French are better than us well it's great to be able to say we're better than them. I think Mr Kennedy, well we all congratulate on his baby and the Tories - are you remembering what I'm remembering, boom and bust, negative equity, remember Mr Howard, I mean are you thinking what I'm thinking I'm remembering, it's all a bit wonky isn't it?
He got ripped apart for that. Now, I don't know why, but it seems that putting a coherent sentence together seems to no longer be a thing.
By Oboogie
#79020
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Mon Nov 11, 2024 3:57 pm Actual quote from Kemi today.
We should be able to say ‘Actually, this isn’t working, what can we do to improve it’, rather than what is happening now where people say, ‘Oh, it’s the rule of law. We can’t touch it. Let’s not do anything.’
She's been an MP for seven years! I wonder what she thinks all those bills she voted on were?
By satnav
#79028
Badenoch keeps banging on about wanting a smaller state but past efforts to create a smaller state actually led to things like the Post Office counter scandal. Until the late 1960's we had a Post Master general who was responsible for all things to do with post offices and the royal mail. But after that post was abolished responsibility for the post office was passed on to the Business Department or other departments related to business.

The post office was in effect put at arms length from the government. In some ways this was a good idea because no ministers wants to be standing up every week answering questions about why a particular post office was opening later or closing earlier than other post offices but at the same time there was less accountability for any failings in the post office.

Badenoch needs to explain how you can have a smaller state whilst maintaining proper accountability.
User avatar
By Crabcakes
#79060
Conservatives never actually want a small state. What they want is to not pay for anything, for other people to pay for everything for them (ideally to companies they own or have interests in), and to not be told to do while telling others exactly what to do.

That’s not small state. It’s targeted state.
mattomac liked this
User avatar
By Abernathy
#79153
I watched Bad Enoch performing at PMQs tday for the first time (I missed it last week), and I must conclude that she was remarkably unimpressive. It occurs to me that any advantages that she might have been expected to benefit from as a woman and as a black person are automatically negated - because she is the leader of the Conservative Party. Also, and this might sound horribly shallow, she is not a good-looking woman. In the modern media age in which political leaders do benefit from being photogenic or camera-friendly, this is another advantage that is denied to Ms. Badenoch.
Dalem Lake liked this
User avatar
By Crabcakes
#79160
I hear a really good look for opposition leaders is to have all your questions on a sheet of A4, then when you ask one, fold down the paper so the next question is at the top and after a few minutes you have something resembling a clumsy child’s attempt at a fan. Because nothing says competent like not even being able to remember whereabouts you are on a page.
User avatar
By Abernathy
#79165
Killer Whale wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2024 12:15 pm
Abernathy wrote: Wed Nov 13, 2024 10:26 pm Also, and this might sound horribly shallow, she is not a good-looking woman.
Depressing that we're having to discuss this.

Nevertheless, I disagree.
Well, that's the end of the discussion then, isn't it? I voice an opinion, you say you disagree. Let's hope that relieves your depression. :-|
User avatar
By Abernathy
#79175
Youngian wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2024 3:22 pm Might sound shallow to disagree but Kemi's the hottest woman to ever lead the Conservative Party.
Maybe true. Alan Clark and Francois Mitterand might have disagreed with you there.
User avatar
By Yug
#79336
She's off to a good start

Kemi Badenoch’s personal approval ratings at the start of her Tory leadership are worse than those recorded by Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson at the start of their reigns, according to the latest Opinium poll for the Observer.

The new Tory leader’s net approval rating – the difference between those who approve or disapprove of the job she is doing – sits at -5%. The only former party leader of the past five years that she beats in terms of her starting popularity is Liz Truss, whose first approval rating was -9% after she won the leadership...

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... d-johnsons
Why are these populists so unpopular? It's like they don't appeal to normal people, or something.
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#79529
The actual Leader of the Opposition.
The prime minister’s foreign policy is a pick and mix of empty platitudes, unilateral commitments that he could have announced at home, and dangerous precedents – rushing to give away the Chagos islands and paying for the privilege, an ill-judged suspension of export licences to Israel, damaging our defence and security industry and failing to set out a roadmap for spending 2.5% GDP on defence in a world that is becoming yet more dangerous.
I hope the prime minister is up to the very real and serious challenges posed to our security and prosperity.
Aside from the 2.5% point, which her lot never did even when they hadn't called for a load of extra tax cuts, this is basically Spectator bollocks.

How have Defence and Security been damaged?
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
long long title how many chars? lets see 123 ok more? yes 60

We have created lots of YouTube videos just so you can achieve [...]

Another post test yes yes yes or no, maybe ni? :-/

The best flat phpBB theme around. Period. Fine craftmanship and [...]

Do you need a super MOD? Well here it is. chew on this

All you need is right here. Content tag, SEO, listing, Pizza and spaghetti [...]

Lasagna on me this time ok? I got plenty of cash

this should be fantastic. but what about links,images, bbcodes etc etc? [...]