Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

Sham Cam

111 replies

newwave · 22/11/2010 00:23

Touching to see Mr and Mrs Cam crying at the school their late Son Ivan went to and all the nice words about the care he received. Pity is that he dosent give a toss for other children in the same or similiar positions, if he did he would not be cutting so much child provision.

Still not suprised, being a Tory or voting Tory says you are a selfish person.

OP posts:
claig · 23/11/2010 21:24

In a democracy, shouldn't they honour the commitments to the electorate, or do foreign agreements and institutions take precedence over the people that they are supposed to be representing, the people who pay for their duck houses, moats and flipped homes.

huddspur · 23/11/2010 21:24

We don't want to relax our green targets as doing that could to lead to environmental disaster in the future

claig · 23/11/2010 21:22

Can't they save money by relaxing some of their green targets? They could renegotiate their agreements and targets and postpone them until we recover if they felt like it. But don't hold your breath, they won't, they think these agreeements are more important than the sick, elderly and disabled. Oh, and the caring socialists agree with them, that's why they are so quiet.

huddspur · 23/11/2010 21:20

We are going to honour it because we should try to honour committments that we make as a country.

We don't have any socialists because the country doesn't want them, the last socialists we had in public life Foot and Kinnock were laughed out of town.

claig · 23/11/2010 21:17

Why do we need to honour that agreement, when Blair and Brown and Clegg etc. don't honour their manifesto commitments to the voting public? We are supposed to be in a financial crisis, the biggest since teh 1930s, and they have just increased the foreign aid budget and want to cut the disability budget. Where are our caring socialists? Aren't they supposed to be on the side of the people?

huddspur · 23/11/2010 21:13

They've signed up to that agreement as well but they are choosing not to honour it, doesn't mean that that we shouldn't

claig · 23/11/2010 21:11

The US and Sweden have reduced their foreign aid in this climate. How come we let the disabled suffer and increase foreign aid? Don't they often tell us that some of this aid ends up in the wrong hands anyway? Where are the caring socialists, who care so much about our poor, elderly and disadvantaged? If you believe that, then you probably also believe in Father Christmas?

huddspur · 23/11/2010 21:04

Have we not signed up to contribute 0.7% of GDP in foreign aid as part of the millenium development goals.

claig · 23/11/2010 20:59

'if he were to completely protect all disabled provision, where is he supposed to get that money form?'

he can find the money. he has increased the foreign aid budget. He could take some out of that in an emergency. He tells us that the country's finances are like a family's finances. When a family faces hard times, it doesn't increase its contributions to charity, it cuts back until it can again afford it. But you won't hear Labour complaining anytime soon.

catinthehat2 · 23/11/2010 20:24

Hudd - have a look at the Private Eye website, they have been running stories on this for months. (search term Vodafone). The stories appear to be coming from some very disgruntled insiders who obviously reckoned Vodafone was over a barrel. Only the personal intervention of the HMRC head honcho offering a low settlement appears to have saved them - it's a story which is not going to die down.

huddspur · 23/11/2010 19:47

I think vodafone and hmrc had been arguing over how much vodafone owed them for years and HMRC accepted an amount that was lower than they thought they were owed in order to bring the matter to a close and get some revenue.
I'm not sure on this though

herbietea · 23/11/2010 19:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

thesecondcoming · 23/11/2010 19:40

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

huddspur · 23/11/2010 19:36

The problem with Labour was not there approach to the recession, it was the building up of a structural deficit before the recession as they believed that they had abolished boom and bust. This meant that we went into a recession already with a deficit which was added to by the Governments attempts to stimulate the economy by borrowing money and so we now have a monstrous deficit.

smallwhitecat · 23/11/2010 19:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
newwave · 23/11/2010 19:33

Ok, I truly beleive their sorrow was genuine and heartfelt HOWEVER I also believe they care very little for others in the same or similiar position, if they did they would target the cuts at those who can afford them or maybe cancel Trident, cancel the royals civil list (they dont need it), cancel the high speed rail link through the Chilterns (spending bundles to save 20-30 minutes on a journey).

OP posts:
thesecondcoming · 23/11/2010 19:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

smallwhitecat · 23/11/2010 19:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

2shoes · 23/11/2010 19:25

you are so not wrong op
I have the deepest sympathy for them for thier loss.
but he is a con man imo

smallwhitecat · 23/11/2010 19:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

catinthehat2 · 23/11/2010 19:20

Another brilliantly high scoring OP there newwave.

" being a Tory or voting Tory says you are a selfish person" 150 points

general old hat tribalism - 25 points (as usual for your posts, but thanks all the same)

sheer vileness about 2 bereaved parents - 400 points

(You missed out "Thatchers Britain", lost me 75 points)

sarah293 · 23/11/2010 19:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

thesecondcoming · 23/11/2010 19:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

locotitis · 23/11/2010 19:08

The problem is that the politicians made false promises and some people believed. No-one can be protected when you've got to reduce a deficit of 12% of GDP.

sarah293 · 23/11/2010 19:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Swipe left for the next trending thread