What no jeremy cobyn thread?

Personally I don't like any of the 4, I don't see how any of them are electable, they're either tainted by the last 15 years (Burnham / Cooper), have policies which are probably not going to endear them to a wider GE audience (Corbyn) or just don't seem up to it (Kendall).
Labour seem to be where the Tories were between 1997-2005 and you wonder how many leaders its going to take before they get someone who's actually electable.

Good to see Gordon Brown is going to intervene... I'm sure the Labour party will pay a lot of attention to what he has to say...
 
chrism_scotland said:
Personally I don't like any of the 4, I don't see how any of them are electable, they're either tainted by the last 15 years (Burnham / Cooper), have policies which are probably not going to endear them to a wider GE audience (Corbyn) or just don't seem up to it (Kendall).
Labour seem to be where the Tories were between 1997-2005 and you wonder how many leaders its going to take before they get someone who's actually electable.

Good to see Gordon Brown is going to intervene... I'm sure the Labour party will pay a lot of attention to what he has to say...
Click to expand...

Sarcasm? Brown holds more respect than Blair does among the Labour Party - especially post-Scottish No vote. In terms of the big hitters from the last labour government that have voiced an opinion, he'll command the most attention.
 
Personally I have almost as little respect for Brown as I have for Blair. Well perhaps I may have bought a used car from Brown, certainly NOT from Blair :eek:
However I do find it astonishing that the Labour "elder statesmen" are all coming out of the woodwork and denouncing Corbyn, it seems they're all running scared of a new democracy in the party. It's long overdue that it's run from the membership up rather than the leadership down!
 
bindex said:
I have almost as little respect for Brown as I have for Blair. Well perhaps I may have bought a used car from Brown, certainly NOT from Blair :eek:
Click to expand...
TBH I trust none of them, I certainly wouldn't buy a used car from a politician ( of any party)
And yet we let them run the country? ;)
bindex said:
It's long overdue that it's run from the membership up rather than the leadership down!
Click to expand...
Maybe this is the true "new labour" they promised a few years ago, Eh? ;)
 
decigallen said:
Sarcasm? Brown holds more respect than Blair does among the Labour Party - especially post-Scottish No vote. In terms of the big hitters from the last labour government that have voiced an opinion, he'll command the most attention.
Click to expand...

Last time I drove down the M90 through Fife, there was a wonderful message for Gordie in a field along the lines of "thanks for f-ing it up good and proper". But at least he had the sense, unlike virtually every other NuLabourite has/had, to keep Britain out of the Eurozone.
 
RufusG said:
Last time I drove down the M90 through Fife, there was a wonderful message for Gordie in a field along the lines of "thanks for f-ing it up good and proper". But at least he had the sense, unlike virtually every other NuLabourite has/had, to keep Britain out of the Eurozone.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, you've just reminded me of the one good thing that GB ever done. Well until someone reminds me of the others.
 
Looks like Blairs cronies tried to destroy any access to democratic process the Labour party supporters might have...

"Lord Mandelson, one of the architects of “new” Labour, privately appealed last week to the Kendall, Cooper and Burnham camps to quit the contest before ballot papers were sent out, according to sources.One said: “Lord Mandelson and other Blairites were saying – this is a disgrace, let’s get this thing pulled. But it was not going to happen.”

The peer is understood to have believed that the party might suspend the contest if there was only one candidate, but he had to back down when officials said it would mean Mr Corbyn won."

I guessed they thought if there was a re-run they would make sure Corbyn was no longer on the ballot, so the estimated 50%+ of the party that polls say support him could not vote for him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-Jeremy-Corbyn-winning-Labour-leadership.html
 
What a muppet.
 
What's more ridiculous than the sense of privilege is the complete lack of self awareness.

There's a massive social movement at work here, and these idiots think they have the power to stand on the beach and turn back the tide. It makes them look ridiculous and like relics of the past.
 
dejongj said:
Fair enough, you've just reminded me of the one good thing that GB ever done. Well until someone reminds me of the others.
Click to expand...
Liberated interest rate control from the whims of chancellors. Best thing to come out of the Blair/Brown dynasty, and it wasn't even in the 1997 manifesto.
 
Agree with Phil here - there seems no awareness of anything. Its hard to come to terms in my head with just how utterly detached from public / party / daily news most of the 'top' labour MPs/controllers seem to be . It almost makes me want to be invisible and follow some of them around for a bit, just to see what sort of existence they live and how they seem to have ended up on a different planet to the general population.

Its now being revealed there is pretty much nothing they will not sink to in order to hang on to control of the population. Its almost like looking into some bleak ego filled madness. Makes me think it more likely something happened to the weapons chap Kelly than I used to think.

Whether you support Corbyn or not, his existence must be filling many and varied people with deep concern - not from his own beliefs and policies, but from what he has shown us of other peoples behaviors and approaches.

There have been several protest marches this year in the city nearest to me. I had the traffic news on in the car a few weeks back and got several references from local stations about traffic best avoiding a 'protest march' in the center of the city. I swopped channels trying to find out what the protest was about. I got first puzzled then suspicious when EVERY single reference on air only refereed to it as a 'protest march' and not the subject or reason. Usually the radio say what its about. No interviews with police or participants either, which they frequently do.

Couple of days later, because it still bugged me, I sought the answer on the internet and it turned out to be a big anti austerity march - apparently one of several this year, none of which I had heard of despite living so close. I found out mostly from small sites, the main local news outlets had nothing front and center that I could locate.

So why would none of the radio stations say what the subject was as they usually would? None of them at all out of several stations?

Can't help but feel that putting together the bizarre protest march 'secrecy' to the present panic of politicians over Corbyn, could add up to us living in very, very oppressive times and I am only just realizing how much the normal population are herded like sheep to the 'correct' fields 'for our own good'. Depressing. Scary.

Boris in London buying water canon and military grade sound blasters. I dont think things are looking good really. Hope I am misjudging it and being overly pessimistic.
 
Whether you are being overly pessimistic or not, it is always, and I mean always, right to question the authorities. It's the only way democracy can work.

FWIW, I think you're being only slightly pessimistic.

We should be particularly sceptical of erosion of rights justified by whatever fears the media has tried to sell us this week.
 
Last edited:
"Public war of words erupts between parties of candidates rivalling frontrunner Jeremy Corbyn in Labour leadership race, each calling on the other to ‘step back’"
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/17/labour-leadership-andy-burnham-yvette-cooper-contest
I increasingly look at this stuff over the last few weeks and its like immature kids bickering, its beyond pathetic. I just want to scream 'get some policies, have some ideas of your own' but they still think they will win just by slagging people off or frankly, trying to cheat.


Best idea any of the '3' have come up with this week is this from Liz Kendal
"...Liz Kendall has called for the publication of a full breakdown of election results so members could see the extent to which new election rules boosted Jeremy Corbyn’s campaign."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ffect-of-change-to-voting-rules-10459782.html

Though she is wrong to focus it on Corbyns campaign - she would be wiser to examine the breakdown and apply it to the results of each of the candidates campaigning efforts - might learn something there!. Apart from that, party members should have the right to know the results of elections they are funding. What happened to open government and Freedom of Information that they want to hide the breakdown results...?

I am speculating that she will find the results are not what she hopes they will be, as I think she is assuming long term Labour party members will all vote for one of the '3' and Corbyns votes will only come from the £3 voters. I keep seeing news comments stating the £3 voters are all naive youths with not a brain cell in their inexperienced heads (itself an insult to the voters). I know of 5 people who intend to vote for Corbyn and they range from 45 to 70 years of age, so hardly 'inexperienced' youth. Most of the people I know are fairly centrist politically, but even they are running out of parties to vote for as things go further and further to the right in UK politics. Now they see Corbyn as a hope to re-establish a balance and an active Opposition (yes, one that bothers to oppose!). Its better for the people if there is a good Opposition in Parliament, it helps curtail extreams in any direction - left or right, and promotes ideas and options. I wonder how many people can still remember what an active and committed Opposition actually looks like, rather than one that just turns up to warm a bench and take the salary and perks?

Even if Corbyn turned out to be entirely elected by £3 voters and not a single long term party member voted for him, I still don't see how that helps her as it will still all be by the official rules, so presumably not open to challenge on that ground?
 
Last edited:
The Tories of the 80s and 90s helped move the centre to the right and Blair's new labour compounded this by moving the party in that direction rather than trying to tug it properly back once in power. Corbyn's manifesto only looks 'far left' (as the papers are calling it) because the centre is now really somewhere to the right of what it should be. His policies aren't pie in the sky either. Plenty of economists have supported what he has said on the economy, and his social policies are being very well recieved by the young.

Labour should be anti-austerity. I thought it despicable of Burnham this week to say he was fighting for those 'who want to suceed.' The very inference is that those who are on benefits are lazy and content scroungers, with no desire to suceed or better themselves. How dare he peddle that Tory-lite crap. Many people in this country have had to switch their vision of success to being able to afford food and housing. When you can't afford to live properly, desires to further your career and enrich your life are left on the backburner.

As for Corbyn's unelectability. Cooper, Kendall and Burnham were key players in the recent hammering that labour took in a general election. Unlike Corbyn, they have a history of failure, so why are many loubourites convinced they can do better in 2020?!? The way I see it, if we slide out of the EU and Austerity gains pace, a Left-wing donkey with a red ribbon around it's neck could displace the Tories.
 
Corbyn is anti-EU too. Looks like we'll be leaving.
 
with Blair, Brown and now Kinnock against him he cannot fail but to win

(it is all irrelevant - IF Labour were to win the next Election, (which they won't), IF Corbin leads them, (which he may) and tries to implement his policies, the rest of the "party" and Parliament will vote against them - so you have nothing to fear from Jeremy as the Leader of the Labour Party)

I hope he gets the job - it will provide the "shake up" that is needed, sweeping away all the "old" pseudo socialist idiots that pontificate and offer wise words of "crap" ……. it is just what the Labour Party needs at this time

IM simple HO
 
Last edited:
decigallen said:
The Tories of the 80s and 90s helped move the centre to the right and Blair's new labour compounded this by moving the party in that direction rather than trying to tug it properly back once in power. Corbyn's manifesto only looks 'far left' (as the papers are calling it) because the centre is now really somewhere to the right of what it should be. His policies aren't pie in the sky either. Plenty of economists have supported what he has said on the economy, and his social policies are being very well recieved by the young.

Labour should be anti-austerity. I thought it despicable of Burnham this week to say he was fighting for those 'who want to suceed.' The very inference is that those who are on benefits are lazy and content scroungers, with no desire to suceed or better themselves. How dare he peddle that Tory-lite crap. Many people in this country have had to switch their vision of success to being able to afford food and housing. When you can't afford to live properly, desires to further your career and enrich your life are left on the backburner.
Click to expand...
You see I never understood the logic in that wanting everyone to do better is seen as something negative. I really don't get how something so good and positive can be interpreted in such a negative manner.

Isn't the time to further your career exactly when you can't afford to live properly. Surely you would want to take self responsibility and do something about and applaud supporting those?
 
dejongj said:
You see I never understood the logic in that wanting everyone to do better is seen as something negative. I really don't get how something so good and positive can be interpreted in such a negative manner.

Isn't the time to further your career exactly when you can't afford to live properly. Surely you would want to take self responsibility and do something about and applaud supporting those?
Click to expand...
It's the myth that if you work hard you will succeed and if you didn't succeed its because you were lazy or didn't try hard enough.
 
rjbell said:
It's the myth that if you work hard you will succeed and if you didn't succeed its because you were lazy or didn't try hard enough.
Click to expand...
Working hard doesn't make you succeed. Working clever makes you succeed. But that is nitpicking as I understand what you mean.

If you didn't succeed at what you wanted to achieve maybe you just aren't good enough and should set your sights differently. However that isn't be point. The point is that focussing on success is suggested to be a bad Tory thing. I find that very strange.
 
rjbell said:
It's the myth that if you work hard you will succeed and if you didn't succeed its because you were lazy or didn't try hard enough.
Click to expand...

As ever the answer is somewhere in the middle. Not everyone who claims benefits and doesn't work is a scrounger but many are. The almost impossible part is to penalise the scrounger while protecting the needy.

Austerity has been tough but as a country economically it seems to be working. It's not a great choice but getting is further into debt does not strike me as a better choice.
 
cambsno said:
As ever the answer is somewhere in the middle. Not everyone who claims benefits and doesn't work is a scrounger but many are. The almost impossible part is to penalise the scrounger while protecting the needy.

Austerity has been tough but as a country economically it seems to be working. It's not a great choice but getting is further into debt does not strike me as a better choice.
Click to expand...
Except it's not succeeding, growth is slow to non-existent, and the only plan to make things better is more of the same.
The plan was that we'd be out of the deficit by now, but it's growing.
I don't understand how that as a policy is a success. Unless the only measure you use is that the person responsible for the plan just says it is, so it must be.
 
Cambsno dejongj both of you are really simplifying things. You could say comprehensives schools give every child the same opportunists, but the millions on welfare state proves this not to be true. Its a lot more complicated than plain old laziness. Everyone in life wants to succeed, but where would you even begin if you don't have supportive parents. You have parents who have low opinions of themselves, which inevitable rubs off on them. Then there are employers dumping job applications with names they deem as chavy. Not to mention things like Internships. Then there are people who are just not very intelligent. Where once they may have worked in a factory or mine, now perhaps are expected to be able to man a computer in a call centre. Very difficult if you can not read and write very well (like myself!)
 
Last edited:
rjbell said:
Cambsno dejongj both of you are really simplifying things. You could say comprehensives schools give every child the same opportunists, but the millions on welfare state proves this not to be true. Its a lot more complicated than plain old laziness. Everyone in life wants to succeed, but where would you even begin if you don't have supportive parents. You have parents who have low opinions of themselves, which inevitable rubs off on them. Then there are employers dumping job applications with names they deem as chavy. Not to mention things like Internships. Then there are people who are just not very intelligent. Where once they may have worked in a factory or mine, now perhaps are expected to be able to man a computer in a call centre. Very difficult if you can not read and write very well (like myself!)
Click to expand...
All I responded to was that it was taken to fight for those who want to succeed is seen as a negative. Every, valid in my opinion, point you make above I class as people who want to be successful. Making a statement like fighting for those who want to succeed doesn't mean you won't fight for those who can't or have different needs. And to suggest that someone who want to fight for those who want to succeed is a Tory and spouting its usual crap to me suggests a lot of ignorance and lack of care for those who require a bit more help along the way.

However, I do think that a great deal of people must be much more mobile and take control of their own destiny.
 
dejongj said:
All I responded to was that it was taken to fight for those who want to succeed is seen as a negative. Every, valid in my opinion, point you make above I class as people who want to be successful. Making a statement like fighting for those who want to succeed doesn't mean you won't fight for those who can't or have different needs. And to suggest that someone who want to fight for those who want to succeed is a Tory and spouting its usual crap to me suggests a lot of ignorance and lack of care for those who require a bit more help along the way.

However, I do think that a great deal of people must be much more mobile and take control of their own destiny.
Click to expand...

I was referring to "If you didn't succeed at what you wanted to achieve maybe you just aren't good enough and should set your sights differently". It's all very well you think they should take control of there own destiny, however it's evident this just doesn't happen.

However i take your point about andys comment. Perhaps i've read too much into it.
 
Last edited:
MidnightUK said:
Agree with Phil here - there seems no awareness of anything. Its hard to come to terms in my head with just how utterly detached from public / party / daily news most of the 'top' labour MPs/controllers seem to be . It almost makes me want to be invisible and follow some of them around for a bit, just to see what sort of existence they live and how they seem to have ended up on a different planet to the general population.

Its now being revealed there is pretty much nothing they will not sink to in order to hang on to control of the population. Its almost like looking into some bleak ego filled madness. Makes me think it more likely something happened to the weapons chap Kelly than I used to think.

Whether you support Corbyn or not, his existence must be filling many and varied people with deep concern - not from his own beliefs and policies, but from what he has shown us of other peoples behaviors and approaches.

There have been several protest marches this year in the city nearest to me. I had the traffic news on in the car a few weeks back and got several references from local stations about traffic best avoiding a 'protest march' in the center of the city. I swopped channels trying to find out what the protest was about. I got first puzzled then suspicious when EVERY single reference on air only refereed to it as a 'protest march' and not the subject or reason. Usually the radio say what its about. No interviews with police or participants either, which they frequently do.

Couple of days later, because it still bugged me, I sought the answer on the internet and it turned out to be a big anti austerity march - apparently one of several this year, none of which I had heard of despite living so close. I found out mostly from small sites, the main local news outlets had nothing front and center that I could locate.

So why would none of the radio stations say what the subject was as they usually would? None of them at all out of several stations?

Can't help but feel that putting together the bizarre protest march 'secrecy' to the present panic of politicians over Corbyn, could add up to us living in very, very oppressive times and I am only just realizing how much the normal population are herded like sheep to the 'correct' fields 'for our own good'. Depressing. Scary.

Boris in London buying water canon and military grade sound blasters. I dont think things are looking good really. Hope I am misjudging it and being overly pessimistic.
Click to expand...

I gave up long ago expecting news coverage that wasn't biased or offering a true reflection of what is happening.

There have been many protest UK wide this past year or two for many different reasons. Disabled chaining themselves to railings outside parliament, blockading main streets in London, opposing the cruel and pernicious policies being imposed on them with dire consequences. The closing of the "independent living fund" which enables severely disabled people to remain in the community and have some semblance of a "normal" life, instead of institutional living. Thousands marching up and down the UK in protest at the austerity imposed on the country. Do we see this reported on main stream TV? Possibly a small mention. The destruction of our public services, in particular the NHS. Plenty negative stories of poor care of patients, mismanagement, all to have people believe it's not fit for purpose hence the need for privatisation. I rely on Twitter to keep me informed.
 
Maggie52 said:
I gave up long ago expecting news coverage that wasn't biased or offering a true reflection of what is happening.

There have been many protest UK wide this past year or two for many different reasons. Disabled chaining themselves to railings outside parliament, blockading main streets in London, opposing the cruel and pernicious policies being imposed on them with dire consequences. The closing of the "independent living fund" which enables severely disabled people to remain in the community and have some semblance of a "normal" life, instead of institutional living. Thousands marching up and down the UK in protest at the austerity imposed on the country. Do we see this reported on main stream TV? Possibly a small mention. The destruction of our public services, in particular the NHS. Plenty negative stories of poor care of patients, mismanagement, all to have people believe it's not fit for purpose hence the need for privatisation. I rely on Twitter to keep me informed.
Click to expand...
I find that local radio has got plenty of news on those kind of protests, here in beautiful London LBC has got pretty good coverage. But ultimately it is a small minority protesting after they lost an election since not enough people voted for what they wanted. That is also democracy in action.

Hey as long as the NHS can prescribe gluten free flower to people so they don't have to pay for it themselves I think they have a pretty good deal ;) The problem with non reporters reporting is that they don't check their facts before tweeting on the twitter ;)
 
dejongj said:
I find that local radio has got plenty of news on those kind of protests, here in beautiful London LBC has got pretty good coverage. But ultimately it is a small minority protesting after they lost an election since not enough people voted for what they wanted. That is also democracy in action.

Hey as long as the NHS can prescribe gluten free flower to people so they don't have to pay for it themselves I think they have a pretty good deal ;) The problem with non reporters reporting is that they don't check their facts before tweeting on the twitter ;)[/QUOTE

I disagree that the protests were a small minority of people. Some perhaps but certainly not all, London is not the only city where protests occurred, Manchester, Newcastle, to name but two.
I'm not sure why you refer to " losing an election" many of the protests occurred long before the GE.

I'm sorry you've lost me with your reference to NHS and gluten free flower ( I suspect you mean flour) Is this your view on the merits of the NHS?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your spelling correction, yes your assumption is correct. There was no deeper meaning to the NHS comment, it is what it is.


But yes it is a minority. And why no listen to other local news. Such small minority gatherings aren't always worthy of national news. Besides they don't achieve anything anyway.
 
Phil V said:
Except it's not succeeding, growth is slow to non-existent, and the only plan to make things better is more of the same.
The plan was that we'd be out of the deficit by now, but it's growing.
I don't understand how that as a policy is a success. Unless the only measure you use is that the person responsible for the plan just says it is, so it must be.
Click to expand...

There are many ways to measure an economy, and probably many stats to prove either way. However, as a balance I genuinely believe we are have a better economy than most countries, growth may not be as high as we may like, but probably far better than many of the EU states. According to the economist only Germany, Malta, Czech R have better employment figures... and sure that many French or Spanish would prefer our economic status to theirs.

None of actually know what is best - maybe had someone like Corbyn got into power 5 years ago we could be in an amazing place, although I doubt it.
 
rjbell said:
Cambsno dejongj both of you are really simplifying things. You could say comprehensives schools give every child the same opportunists, but the millions on welfare state proves this not to be true. Its a lot more complicated than plain old laziness. Everyone in life wants to succeed, but where would you even begin if you don't have supportive parents. You have parents who have low opinions of themselves, which inevitable rubs off on them. Then there are employers dumping job applications with names they deem as chavy. Not to mention things like Internships. Then there are people who are just not very intelligent. Where once they may have worked in a factory or mine, now perhaps are expected to be able to man a computer in a call centre. Very difficult if you can not read and write very well (like myself!)
Click to expand...

That is life! There are many factors that make us who we are, and yes, being born into a 2nd or 3rd generation unemployed family will probably mean that you have a harder chance than say myself to 'make it. I do look occasionally at those high flyers who benefitted from a public school education (and the connections that brings) with envy but you know what, most of us can get there if we want to. There are plenty of success stories from people who have made a real success despite factors holding them back.

Like I said, there are many deserving people on benefits, but also many people who are lazy.
 
dejongj said:
Working hard doesn't make you succeed. Working clever makes you succeed. But that is nitpicking as I understand what you mean.

If you didn't succeed at what you wanted to achieve maybe you just aren't good enough and should set your sights differently. However that isn't be point. The point is that focussing on success is suggested to be a bad Tory thing. I find that very strange.
Click to expand...

The inference from Burnham was that people on benefits are scroungers. That IS a bad Tory idea peddled by right-wing mainstream media.

I'm not on benefits. I've never had to be on benefits. I've gotten far and been successful in my life's goals. But that doesn't mean I bemoan those who have to claim benefits. Plus we're all only a car crash away from being on benefits - I've seen it happen first hand. Does Burnham really think that people are content to be poor and going to food banks? That they're simply lazy or unmotivated? I know a great musician - a virtuoso guitarist and great songwriter - in Belfast who works double shifts to support his partner and their (unplanned) kid. He works so ridiculously hard that it leaves very little time for him to push his talent in a way that would bring him success.
 
rjbell said:
It's the myth that if you work hard you will succeed and if you didn't succeed its because you were lazy or didn't try hard enough.
Click to expand...


SOLD on a wholesale basis. and swallowed by the middle class masses to turn them all against the people who have to use benefits system. I am a supporter of weeding out the cheats btw!
 
decigallen said:
The inference from Burnham was that people on benefits are scroungers. That IS a bad Tory idea peddled by right-wing mainstream media.

.
Click to expand...

He can't be held to be responsible for what you want to hear. He didn't say that at all...And nor do the Tories say that.
 
LASTOLITE said:
SOLD on a wholesale basis. and swallowed by the middle class masses to turn them all against the people who have to use benefits system. I am a supporter of weeding out the cheats btw!
Click to expand...
Interestingly, almost everyone is.

But would we actually vote for the budget spent on benefits fraud compared to the size of the fraud, and the amount spent on investigating tax evasion as a proportion of loss?

I don't have the figures to hand but there are 10x as many Benefit fraud investigators as there are tax fraud investigators, and losses in benefit fraud are less than 1% of that in tax evasion.

But still, them thieving scroungers eh :rage:
 
Phil V said:
Interestingly, almost everyone is.

But would we actually vote for the budget spent on benefits fraud compared to the size of the fraud, and the amount spent on investigating tax evasion as a proportion of loss?

I don't have the figures to hand but there are 10x as many Benefit fraud investigators as there are tax fraud investigators, and losses in benefit fraud are less than 1% of that in tax evasion.

But still, them thieving scroungers eh :rage:
Click to expand...

I guess there are 2 points, benefit fraud which is relatively low or people on benefits as a lifestyle. There has to be some benefit fraud investigators as a deterrent, same as there are random tx checks or police doing tax disc stuff. But you will never remove benefit cheats, just as you won't crime in general.
 
cambsno said:
I guess there are 2 points, benefit fraud which is relatively low or people on benefits as a lifestyle. There has to be some benefit fraud investigators as a deterrent, same as there are random tx checks or police doing tax disc stuff. But you will never remove benefit cheats, just as you won't crime in general.
Click to expand...
I'm not suggesting there shouldn't be benefit fraud investigators, benefits as a lifestye choice is a whole other thread. But if you're going to respond how do you feel about there being 10 times as many benefit fraud as tax fraud investigators? Particularly given the savings / income that could be generated?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top