What no jeremy cobyn thread?

[nilagin]

Not really. They'd get it automatically from the ticket receipts. One very convenient aspect of the railway's finances is that an awful lot of customers pay an awful lot of money up front for their season tickets. The cash flow is quite healthy.

That would assume that their is sufficient customers season tickets requiring renewal within the first few days of the government taking control again.

 

[Phil V]

That would assume that their is sufficient customers season tickets requiring renewal within the first few days of the government taking control again.

Which is predictable and measurable.

But for those who don't understand economics;

A government can actually 'borrow' money for less than it'll cost to pay back, and if it makes sense for Virgin to invest because they'll make it back and more, why doesn't it make sense for the government.

Those utility companies that are 'privately owned' include other European governments, some countries actually considered it a good idea to 'invest' in their infrastructure and to involve the private sector in creative ways rather than just sell off the franchises. So some of the massive profits we hate the utility companies making are benefitting taxpayers in other countries.

Compare Renault with British Leyland from 1980 to the present, they started from a very similar place (crap designers and strong unions) the British story blames unions for killing the chance of success, which of course plays into the popular story as I laid out earlier.

 

[dejongj]

Cobyn is already showing his true colours and done his first u-turn. He initially said half of the shadow cabinet would be woman in senior positions but has appointed all his mates instead. When challenged by journalists he just walked off in silence refusing to answer the question and complaining to flunkies "these people are bothering me"'

Yes I noticed that. And his "mates" are saying he has got a lot on his plate. Hmm yup and there will be a lot more if he actually ever runs the country. That is no excuse, you can always says sorry not today and call me tomorrow. Or something like that. Very rude.

 

[dejongj]

Which is predictable and measurable.

But for those who don't understand economics;

A government can actually 'borrow' money for less than it'll cost to pay back, and if it makes sense for Virgin to invest because they'll make it back and more, why doesn't it make sense for the government.

Those utility companies that are 'privately owned' include other European governments, some countries actually considered it a good idea to 'invest' in their infrastructure and to involve the private sector in creative ways rather than just sell off the franchises. So some of the massive profits we hate the utility companies making are benefitting taxpayers in other countries.

Compare Renault with British Leyland from 1980 to the present, they started from a very similar place (crap designers and strong unions) the British story blames unions for killing the chance of success, which of course plays into the popular story as I laid out earlier.

Nah Leyland cars were very very very bad as well. The Allegro my dad has was the worst car ever. He changed it for a quality car instead. But internationally it definitely seems that unions and disrespect for a quality product were equally to blame. I remember it well, it came across people were more interested in arguing why not to do something opposed to just getting on with it.

Naturally it is an opinion as I wasn't actually working for Leyland at the time.

 

[Phil V]

Nah Leyland cars were very very very bad as well. The Allegro my dad has was the worst car ever. He changed it for a quality car instead. But internationally it definitely seems that unions and disrespect for a quality product were equally to blame. I remember it well, it came across people were more interested in arguing why not to do something opposed to just getting on with it.

Naturally it is an opinion as I wasn't actually working for Leyland at the time.

Did you ever own a Renault 4?

Seriously in the late 70s and early 80s both companies were building complete dogs. I don't know the details of how the French government turned that around, but selling it off and divorcing themselves from the outcome wasn't it. And it's not a political response to see that they did it right.

Those crappy industrial relations were also commonplace at the time, the only difference between your opinion and mine is that I don't blame only the unions good employee relations are something that needs a lot of work, the Germans and Japanese are very good at it, traditionally we are appalling. It's interesting that British car manufacturing is now being done successfully by the Japanese.

 

[nilagin]

It's poll, and they don't attempt to poll 45 million, they don't need to. But we've explained this to you.

Have you read any of the links we've posted or gone to the pages suggested?

Why would they exist if they couldn't do their job well? Your opinion of them and their methods is hilarious. Yougov claim to know because... they are experts, and they have a proven track record of predicting results.

Back to the soup, if you're only tasting a spoonful from the top, how do you know that the next spoonful will be the same, and the next? Only an idiot would guess that the last spoonful of a bowl of tomato soup would taste of beef broth. But what you're suggesting is that if the first spoonful tastes like tomato, the second could be carrot and coriander, the 3rd could be pea and ham, etc etc.

It's not rocket science, it's statistics, I never did it for O level, but I think I have a grasp.

Do you really think that example is any wear remotely like this or any YOUGOV poll, If you do, I fear you don't have a grasp on reality, let alone statistics.
Go back to my real example about overtime. Ask one shift (A) who wants overtime and there is 50% take up, ask the other shift (B) and you get around 30-35% take up. That alone proves you need to ask everyone or a high proportion to get a realistic figure. YOUGOV has no control of who will be answering each of their polls, they can only base their poll outcome on the people who take the poll. As I said before their poll can only give an indication of what those who have done the poll want. Their assumption of what the rest of the country wants rest is a guess. Not even an educated guess because the difference in numbers is too big. Look at it another way, go back to my example, If you had only asked shift (B) how many wanted overtime and assumed shift (A) wanted the same, you'd fall short of what the actual take up would be. Take it one step further. with no prior knowledge of what each individual is likely to answer, randomly ask just 50% of each shift what overtime they want. There is a very extreme but slim chance that every person asked on both shifts will turn down the overtime, then just double the answers 2x0=0, so using your logic that YOUGOV are right, no one wants any overtime, yet there is 50% of shift (A) and 30-35% of shift (B) that does, but they won't get any because they weren't asked. Even if the 50% of each shift that was asked did include people that wanted overtime, there is no guarantee that you will still achieve the same take up, you could get 5%, 10%, on shift (A) you could even get 100% take up.
As I said before, if YOUGOV held the same poll again, just to keep things neat and simple, let's assume they get 1736 replies again. So long as it's not the same 1736 people answering again, it doesn't really matter if some do, whilst there is a chance you may get the same result of 60%, there is a chance of it being 80% or 40%, 100% or 0%. So you can't say that the results of 1736 entering a poll speak for the whole country.
I've copied and pasted direct from your YOUGOV link. The only additions of mine is underlining the two totally misleading statements

The majority of the British public – including the majority of Conservative voters – support nationalising the energy and rail companies

68% of the public say the energy companies should be run in the public sector, while only 21% say they should remain in private hands. 66% support nationalising the railway companies while 23% think they should be run privately. The British people also tend strongly to prefer a publicly-run National Health Service (as it is now) and a publicly-run Royal Mail (as it was until this year).

 

[nilagin]

Nah Leyland cars were very very very bad as well. The Allegro my dad has was the worst car ever. He changed it for a quality car instead. But internationally it definitely seems that unions and disrespect for a quality product were equally to blame. I remember it well, it came across people were more interested in arguing why not to do something opposed to just getting on with it.

Naturally it is an opinion as I wasn't actually working for Leyland at the time.

I hope his wheels never came off, There was a time when they were doing the wheel nuts up too tight in the factory, the threads were stripping and wheel nuts were coming off, there were reported cases at the time of some unfortunate customers who lost all wheel nuts off the same hub resulting in the wheels coming off. Most people were fortunate to have caught the problem in time however.

 

[Phil V]

Do you really think that example is any wear remotely like this or any YOUGOV poll, If you do, I fear you don't have a grasp on reality, let alone statistics.
Go back to my real example about overtime. Ask one shift (A) who wants overtime and there is 50% take up, ask the other shift (B) and you get around 30-35% take up. That alone proves you need to ask everyone or a high proportion to get a realistic figure. YOUGOV has no control of who will be answering each of their polls, they can only base their poll outcome on the people who take the poll. As I said before their poll can only give an indication of what those who have done the poll want. Their assumption of what the rest of the country wants rest is a guess. Not even an educated guess because the difference in numbers is too big. Look at it another way, go back to my example, If you had only asked shift (B) how many wanted overtime and assumed shift (A) wanted the same, you'd fall short of what the actual take up would be. Take it one step further. with no prior knowledge of what each individual is likely to answer, randomly ask just 50% of each shift what overtime they want. There is a very extreme but slim chance that every person asked on both shifts will turn down the overtime, then just double the answers 2x0=0, so using your logic that YOUGOV are right, no one wants any overtime, yet there is 50% of shift (A) and 30-35% of shift (B) that does, but they won't get any because they weren't asked. Even if the 50% of each shift that was asked did include people that wanted overtime, there is no guarantee that you will still achieve the same take up, you could get 5%, 10%, on shift (A) you could even get 100% take up.
As I said before, if YOUGOV held the same poll again, just to keep things neat and simple, let's assume they get 1736 replies again. So long as it's not the same 1736 people answering again, it doesn't really matter if some do, whilst there is a chance you may get the same result of 60%, there is a chance of it being 80% or 40%, 100% or 0%. So you can't say that the results of 1736 entering a poll speak for the whole country.
I've copied and pasted direct from your YOUGOV link. The only additions of mine is underlining the two totally misleading statements

You simply don't understand how sampling works. It's not about picking comparing shift A with shift B or C.

The way YouGov sample, would look at all the people from the 3 shifts, the percentage of married vs single, mortgages, kids etc. maybe experience levels too.
Then they'd ensure their 'representative sample' matched the profile of the whole workforce. It's not a massive leap to see how you'd now get a predictable result.

So you can see, whilst the soup analogy is 'simplistic' it's actually closer to how the sampling is done than your above fantasy, in that the sample contains the same ingredients as the full pan.

 

[dejongj]

Did you ever own a Renault 4?

Seriously in the late 70s and early 80s both companies were building complete dogs. I don't know the details of how the French government turned that around, but selling it off and divorcing themselves from the outcome wasn't it. And it's not a political response to see that they did it right.

Those crappy industrial relations were also commonplace at the time, the only difference between your opinion and mine is that I don't blame only the unions good employee relations are something that needs a lot of work, the Germans and Japanese are very good at it, traditionally we are appalling. It's interesting that British car manufacturing is now being done successfully by the Japanese.

Funnily enough yes we did own a Renault 4. It was the TL which was the first model with normal seats instead of deckchairs. It was a million times better than the allegro we had previously from new whilst the Renault 4 was second or third hand.

 

[dejongj]

I hope his wheels never came off, There was a time when they were doing the wheel nuts up too tight in the factory, the threads were stripping and wheel nuts were coming off, there were reported cases at the time of some unfortunate customers who lost all wheel nuts off the same hub resulting in the wheels coming off. Most people were fortunate to have caught the problem in time however.

If only we were so lucky to get the damn thing to move. Most mornings you didn't know whether it would start. And you got intimate with the recovery service fairly quickly. Ours was an Orange Estate beautiful for its time.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

Do you really think that example is any wear remotely like this or any YOUGOV poll, If you do, I fear you don't have a grasp on reality, let alone statistics.
Go back to my real example about overtime. Ask one shift (A) who wants overtime and there is 50% take up, ask the other shift (B) and you get around 30-35% take up. That alone proves you need to ask everyone or a high proportion to get a realistic figure.

Yes, the sample calculator shows you need 80 out of the 100 to provide a sample that gives a 95% confidence.

YOUGOV has no control of who will be answering each of their polls, they can only base their poll outcome on the people who take the poll.

looking at their website, it appears they do. they have a pool of 360,00 respondents

Who takes part in Public Opinion research?

Over the last ten years, YouGov has carefully recruited a panel of over 360,000 British adults to take part in our surveys. Panel members are recruited from a host of different sources, including via standard advertising, and strategic partnerships with a broad range of websites.

When a new panel member is recruited, a host of socio-demographic information is recorded. For nationally representative samples, YouGov draws a sub-sample of the panel that is representative of British adults in terms of age, gender, social class and type of newspaper (upmarket, mid-market, red-top, no newspaper), and invites this sub-sample to complete a survey.

To reiterate, with Active Sampling only this sub-sample has access to the questionnaire via their username and password, and respondents can only ever answer each survey once.

Respondents are sent an email inviting them to take part in a survey. The email message includes a link taking them to the YouGov website where the survey is hosted using our proprietary survey software. Everyone taking part receives a modest cash incentive for doing so. This ensures that the sample is not only made up of respondents particularly interested in the issue or with an 'axe to grind'..

As I said before their poll can only give an indication of what those who have done the poll want. Their assumption of what the rest of the country wants rest is a guess. Not even an educated guess because the difference in numbers is too big.

I'd be interested to see how you derived this conclusion.

Look at it another way, go back to my example, If you had only asked shift (B) how many wanted overtime and assumed shift (A) wanted the same, you'd fall short of what the actual take up would be. Take it one step further. with no prior knowledge of what each individual is likely to answer, randomly ask just 50% of each shift what overtime they want. There is a very extreme but slim chance that every person asked on both shifts will turn down the overtime,

That is why data derived from sampling is shown with a confidence interval, generaly 95% or 99%. the calculator gives a sample size of 1752 a confidence factor of 99.997% of being accurate to +-5%.

then just double the answers 2x0=0, so using your logic that YOUGOV are right, no one wants any overtime, yet there is 50% of shift (A) and 30-35% of shift (B) that does, but they won't get any because they weren't asked. Even if the 50% of each shift that was asked did include people that wanted overtime, there is no guarantee that you will still achieve the same take up, you could get 5%, 10%, on shift (A) you could even get 100% take up.
As I said before, if YOUGOV held the same poll again, just to keep things neat and simple, let's assume they get 1736 replies again. So long as it's not the same 1736 people answering again, it doesn't really matter if some do, whilst there is a chance you may get the same result of 60%, there is a chance of it being 80% or 40%, 100% or 0%. So you can't say that the results of 1736 entering a poll speak for the whole country.
I've copied and pasted direct from your YOUGOV link. The only additions of mine is underlining the two totally misleading statements

That chance as demonstrated above is insignificant.

I really am trying to help by showing you how statistical sampling works, it isn't common sense, but with a bit of thought you can see that it is a realistic method. But you need to be aware that your example is not comparable with a large population. Think of your workplace as being a very small tin of stew, to see what lumps of meat and veg are in there, you need to eat a ladel which is a large amount of the small tin, in your workplace analogy that would be 80% of the total population. If there is a massive vat of stew, you don't need to have the same proportion. For a similarly representative sample of 45 million, you need 0.000008%. That is how statistical sampling works, and if you disagree with that you disagree with maths.

 

[Phil V]

Funnily enough yes we did own a Renault 4. It was the TL which was the first model with normal seats instead of deckchairs. It was a million times better than the allegro we had previously from new whilst the Renault 4 was second or third hand.

We (well the ex girlfriend) had a Metro and a Renault 5, whilst the R5 was marginally better, they were both s***e.

 

[jakeblu]

That's interesting. Doesn't mean it's achievable though.

That piece you linked to was effectively a commuter-friendly soundbite in the run-up to the election. Say something that *sounds* good today, forget about it tomorrow.

The specific context there was the news that the 0729 from Brighton to London has been late every single day last year. Cameron said "if the operators continue to fail they should be at risk of losing their franchise" and in that sense he's right. However "fail" has to be defined by the franchise contract and there are no provisions for cherry picking the performance measures in this way. Of course the contract could be changed to incorporate more specific performance measures, but not unilaterally, and not without cost, and there are many in the industry who think there is too much micro management already.

A lot of people would agree that the operators *should* be at risk of losing their franchises when a specific train is late every single day, but the reality is that they *aren't* at risk. Maybe Cameron was just expressing his frustration.

Incidentally, did you see how the language was mangled by the newspaper? Cameron actually said that a failing operator "should be at risk" of losing their franchise. But the first paragraph of the story reported him as saying that they "risk losing their franchise" and the headline says they "will lose franchises". Fascinating to see how the sense got totally changed there.

I never for one moment thought it was anything other than a soundbite.

 

[Cobra]

Don't know it it still applies but I was once told that with the satellite surveilance in place, the necessary powers would know if a missile was
fired and could take steps to intercept very fast.

I believe they called it the star wars programme? But like you not sure if it's true or even viable TBH

 

[Llamaman]

Is that what political debate has sunk to on this forum, playground name calling?

It's called sinking to a level even Corbyn can understand.

Nope, you've descended well beyond his level.

I’m not joining in personal attacks … I don’t do personal attacks.

 

[Llamaman]

I'm struggling to come up with a sensible reason why the prime minister has called Corbyn a threat to national security. That's extremely dangerous language for a politician to use.

It means he's lining up a drone strike in North Islington and wants to make sure the legal position covers his arse.

 

[Phil V]

Where is the money going to come from to reprivatize the Railways and Utilities? How does Corbyn propose to make them more cost effective than anyone did in the past?

They don't need to be 'more cost effective' the utility companies make huge profits that go to the shareholders - those profits could either be reduced and come back to the taxpayer or reduced to nothing to benefit the customers (same taxpayers - mostly), it's not difficult to understand.

The rail companies are making a fair chink of their profits currently from government subsidies - so you and I are giving our hard earned straight to their investors, how would you not like to see that end?

 

[Llamaman]

what incentivises the companies running all the other franchises - for potentially a further 20 years or so, in some cases - to do a decent job?

A penalty and/or termination clause in the contract should they fail to meet performance criteria.

 

[dejongj]

A penalty and/or termination clause in the contract should they fail to meet performance criteria.

Tbf that is there today as well. For some reason you need very clever people to agree it in a contract, and then to manage the contract in an active way, and then follow the procedures to deal with it, and lastly senior management not buckling to enforce it. Too often in the public sector you see bad performance rewarded with even more contracts.

You wouldn't think it is that hard, yet in reality it seems to be. Personally I think it is a cultural thing with not enough skilled people and many others too f*****g polite. And yes I use that swear word on purpose as when there is hundreds of millions or billions at stake please and thank you don't get you anywhere.

 

[woof woof]

This is still the JC thread?

I thought it interesting to see JC on the news as he stepped into the back of his limo and was driven away. Surely a bike or bus would be more appropriate than this display of planet damaging green house emissions generating decadence and less demeaning to the driver too? If it had to be a car surely comrade JC should have driven himself in a 2CV?

This little moment of socialism reminded me of...

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which."

In my experience there are people who express socialist and/or liberal views who given a sniff of power suddenly display totalitarian traits. I do wonder how long it would take JC to show a nasty side if ever elected to No.!0. How long before we find that some are more equal than others and Boxer hears the windmill crumble?

 

[Llamaman]

This little moment of socialism reminded me of...
"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which."

Is that like when a Conservative prime minister promises the "greenest government ever" and then pursues policies directly in contravention of that?
Or a Conservative mayor who was a keen lauder of Section 28, before having a volte face to turn up at gay pride marches. Or who promised to oppose the Iraq war, then voted for it, then changed his mind again after the invasion?


U-turns are not exclusive to the left or centre of politics.

 

[woof woof]

So U turns are acceptable because other people do them?

You don't see the irony of a socialist who rages against the inequalities of our society and wants to redistribute wealth being driven around in a limo? But on the positive side sitting behind the driver of his limo is the closest JC has come to a real job.

And don't get me going on green issues, I've come across far too many greens who'd do more damage to the planet in one day than a fleet of American muscle cars would in a millennium. There are far too many brain cell lite greens who can't find their own bottoms with both hands and a map.

 

[Llamaman]

So U turns are acceptable because other people do them?

No, but it was you who chose to attach the behavior to those of a political persuasion.

Corbyn has usually used a pedal cycle, and doesn't own a car. One cannot say with certainty why - on this one occasion (so far) - he's changed from that, but I suspect safety concerns about a baying mob of journalists trying to shove mics in his face whilst trying to negotiate London traffic may have played a factor.

 

[cambsno]

No, but it was you who chose to attach the behavior to those of a political persuasion.

Corbyn has usually used a pedal cycle, and doesn't own a car. One cannot say with certainty why - on this one occasion (so far) - he's changed from that, but I suspect safety concerns about a baying mob of journalists trying to shove mics in his face whilst trying to negotiate London traffic may have played a factor.

I am by no means a Corbyn fan and I too can't stand many of the so called socialists (most of the union leaders for example who earn very well and claim a lot on expenses). However, he is now a potential PM and leader of the opposition. He will be a bigger security risk (although it is rare for opposition people to be targeted) and can you imagine him battling loads of photographers and journalists on his bike! Plus, leaders of large companies don't just have limos for ego or laziness - their time is valuable and they can be on the phone or checking emails while on the move. His workload will be immense, certainly in the short term and he can't have those conversations on the bike (plus the time he would lose would impact).

I am all for giving him a hard time but in this case i don't see a problem.

 

[Phil V]

This is still the JC thread?

I thought it interesting to see JC on the news as he stepped into the back of his limo and was driven away. Surely a bike or bus would be more appropriate than this display of planet damaging green house emissions generating decadence and less demeaning to the driver too? If it had to be a car surely comrade JC should have driven himself in a 2CV?

This little moment of socialism reminded me of...

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which."

In my experience there are people who express socialist and/or liberal views who given a sniff of power suddenly display totalitarian traits. I do wonder how long it would take JC to show a nasty side if ever elected to No.!0. How long before we find that some are more equal than others and Boxer hears the windmill crumble?

Unfortunately, now he's leader of the opposition there'll be security protocols, I wouldn't imagine it's an easy task to tell your newly appointed personal security to 'f*** off I'm taking the bike' - which I believe was his transport to the House of Commons previously.

Let me be straight, I'm not really a fan, but that attack is pretty unjustified, this is the guy who claimed less than a tenner in expenses in 2010 when the expenses scandal exploded, I think even as a back bench MP he's had enough 'power' to corrupt him a little, yet there appears no evidence of that (we'd know if there was).

 

[StewartR]

Let me be straight, I'm not really a fan, but that attack is pretty unjustified, this is the guy who claimed less than a tenner in expenses in 2010 when the expenses scandal exploded, I think even as a back bench MP he's had enough 'power' to corrupt him a little, yet there appears no evidence of that (we'd know if there was).

Spot on.

 

[Llamaman]

this is the guy who claimed less than a tenner in expenses in 2010 when the expenses scandal exploded, I think even as a back bench MP he's had enough 'power' to corrupt him a little, yet there appears no evidence of that (we'd know if there was).

Although he's come clean about that and admitted it was only so low because his office didn't file the claims in a timely manner. His claims were still amongst the lowest though, and kudos to him for that.

 

[StewartR]

Also surely the government will need a float to pay initial running costs and wages once they have taken back control.

Not really. They'd get it automatically from the ticket receipts. One very convenient aspect of the railway's finances is that an awful lot of customers pay an awful lot of money up front for their season tickets. The cash flow is quite healthy.

That would assume that their is sufficient customers season tickets requiring renewal within the first few days of the government taking control again.

Nope, no such assumption required. In fact the situation you've just described isn't just not necessary, it's not even relevant.

The money from season ticket sales goes into a suspense account and is released monthly to reflect the actual journeys made. So if I'd bought an annual season ticket in January, about 30% of my payment would still be in that account.

 

[Llamaman]

Nope, no such assumption required. In fact the situation you've just described isn't just not necessary, it's not even relevant.

The money from season ticket sales goes into a suspense account and is released monthly to reflect the actual journeys made. So if I'd bought an annual season ticket in January, about 30% of my payment would still be in that account.

That's how it's accounted for, but I suspect the cash flows will be different. I'd be very surprised if they kept a bank account with season ticket cash in and released it monthly. It would be very odd to borrow money to make upfront payments whilst sitting on a pile of cash. The only good reason for 'ring fencing' like that would be if they were legally required to do so.

What happens upon license termination I don't know - the most likely scenarios are that either the franchisee has to make a cash payment to the government equal to accrued season tickets, or else the government inherits the liability of the season tickets, to pass onto the next franchisee as a condition of the franchise.

IIRC, when Stagecoach surrendered the East Coast line early, they had to make a termination payment - perhaps part of this was to cover the liability of the season tickets as the government didn't have a new franchisee lined up and would therefore bear the cost of providing the service season ticket holders had already prepaid.

Of course, if the operator goes bankrupt, this point becomes irrelevant (unless the season tickets are ring fenced)...

 

[Steve Smith]

Funnily enough yes we did own a Renault 4. It was the TL which was the first model with normal seats instead of deckchairs. It was a million times better than the allegro we had previously from new whilst the Renault 4 was second or third hand.

My father used to have a Renault 4 as a company car. It seemed strange at the time and even more so now. Although I do like them.


Steve.

 

[dejongj]

My father used to have a Renault 4 as a company car. It seemed strange at the time and even more so now. Although I do like them.


Steve.

In a weird way they were well ahead of its time. I mean look at current day and there are now so many van derived vehicles on the road and super popular with families. The 4 was fairly spacious (note: I was considerably smaller so may have a distorted view of history) and comfortable on terrible road surfaces.

I still like the genre and wouldn't mind one. My wife just frowns and thinks I've lost the plot.

 

[Steve Smith]

The company he worked for had them as vans too.

I now have a Berlingo and have had a Kangoo. I like the van.car design.


Steve.

 

[kendo1]

Looks like he can't sing.

 

[dejongj]

A bit disappointing how quickly he moves his principles aside. Sure it is the practical thing to do for the team, but for someone who fought his campaign on principles it doesn't bode well.

 

[eeyore]

Looks like he can't sing.

I bet he's not the only one there...

 

[rjbell]

A bit disappointing how quickly he moves his principles aside. Sure it is the practical thing to do for the team, but for someone who fought his campaign on principles it doesn't bode well.

What are you referring too?

 

[dejongj]

What are you referring too?

He will join Her Majesty's council, have to go down on one knee and kiss her hand whilst agreeing to:

You will not know or understand of any manner of thing to be attempted, done or spoken against Her Majesty's Person, Honour, Crown or Dignity Royal.

Ok he hasn't done that yet, but would be rather hypocritical considering his stance regarding the monarchy, hypocritical but also deceitful unless he now all of a sudden supports the monarchy. I would have more respect if he stuck to his word and refused and forced the issue.

 

[Phil V]

He will join Her Majesty's council, have to go down on one knee and kiss her hand whilst agreeing to:

You will not know or understand of any manner of thing to be attempted, done or spoken against Her Majesty's Person, Honour, Crown or Dignity Royal.

Ok he hasn't done that yet, but would be rather hypocritical considering his stance regarding the monarchy, hypocritical but also deceitful unless he now all of a sudden supports the monarchy. I would have more respect if he stuck to his word and refused and forced the issue.

He's sworn allegiance to the queen for every year he's been an MP, it's hardly a change of heart, just something the media have picked up on.

Again, I'm not his apologist, but smears by the right wing media should be questioned rather than swallowed whole.

 

[dejongj]

He's sworn allegiance to the queen for every year he's been an MP, it's hardly a change of heart, just something the media have picked up on.

Again, I'm not his apologist, but smears by the right wing media should be questioned rather than swallowed whole.

Sure but the privy council goes well beyond that.

 

[Phil V]

Sure but the privy council goes well beyond that.

Not that far, if you read what the 'expert' said after he'd been misquoted by the Sun.