Ge 2017

[SocketRocket]

That's a bit rich from the editor of the daily mail

Another rather silly post.

 

[richy]

Some of you are just making it up. When the security level becomes 'Critical' then Troops are put on the street to back up the police. What is it about that you find difficult to understand? When the level was lowered they were removed.

What I'm finding difficult to understand is why after being warned repeatedly by experts that we risk becoming more and more vulnerable by cutting security services, she went ahead and done it anyway.

Her arrogance knows no bounds

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Some of you are just making it up. When the security level becomes 'Critical' then Troops are put on the street to back up the police. What is it about that you find difficult to understand? When the level was lowered they were removed.

Rubbish, they are simply another tool in her toolbox,
We won't see troops everytime the alert state goes to Critical.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies

Find your own constituency and see how much you know about it.........quite interesting........I got lost on the way to the shops

 

[Hacker Khan]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies

Find your own constituency and see how much you know about it.........quite interesting........I got lost on the way to the shops

I liked the property prices one, as there was a lot of spare room on the right of the scale where I live. Got it within 2 grand though which I was proud of.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I answered one for my old constituency in England and did a lot better. 20 years since I have lived there.
Quite surprised how close it was now to my Scottish one.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

You seem to have missed my point. All of them fib!

I see Corbyn has learned the art of the U-turn. He's gone from not supporting shoot to kill to now saying he'll support the police in any level of force they deem appropriate.

I know they do - but only get found out AFTER they get elected. But this is obvious a blatant fib and she stands there insistent that there was always going to be a cap subsequent to a consultative Green Paper. Really? I quote from page 65 of the Conservative Party Manifesto 2017

Under the current system, care costs deplete an individual’s assets, including in some
cases the family home, down to £23,250 or even less. These costs can be catastrophic
for those with modest or medium wealth. One purpose of long-term saving is to cover
needs in old age; those who can should rightly contribute to their care from savings
and accumulated wealth, rather than expecting current and future taxpayers to carry
the cost on their behalf. Moreover, many older people have built considerable property
assets due to rising property prices. Reconciling these competing pressures fairly and in
a sustainable way has challenged many governments of the past. We intend to tackle this
with three connected measures.

First, we will align the future basis for means-testing for domiciliary care with that for
residential care, so that people are looked after in the place that is best for them. This will
mean that the value of the family home will be taken into account along with other assets
and income, whether care is provided at home, or in a residential or nursing care home.

Second, to ensure this is fair, we will introduce a single capital floor, set at £100,000,
more than four times the current means test threshold. This will ensure that, no matter
how large the cost of care turns out to be, people will always retain at least £100,000 of
their savings and assets, including value in the family home.

Third, we will extend the current freedom to defer payments for residential care to those
receiving care at home, so no-one will have to sell their home in their lifetime to pay for care.
We believe this powerful combination maximises protection for pensioner households
with modest assets, often invested in the family home, while remaining affordable
for taxpayers. We consider it more equitable, within and across the generations, than
the proposals following the Dilnot Report, which mostly benefited a small number of
wealthier people.

It's not there is it? Neither the cap nor the green Paper. And it would be pretty darned critical to state that there would be a cap if the intention was to have one. The omission was not a mistake.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

But cap or no cap, it's better than the current system

The day after the labour manifesto was published Jezza added an extra bit regarding writing off existing student loans ( nobody is having a go at him for changing published policy or for it being unaffordable)

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

But cap or no cap, it's better than the current system

The day after the labour manifesto was published Jezza added an extra bit regarding writing off existing student loans ( nobody is having a go at him for changing published policy or for it being unaffordable)

I don't necessarily disagree with the policy.

But many elderly homeowners and their families clearly do not see the lack of a cap as making a good policy - for them a cap is utterly fundamental to it being acceptable of not. And there is absolutely no mention of cap or consultation about one in the manifesto. None at all. Yet May stands there - brass neck - complaining that their policy has been misrepresented, scaremongering. Saying that the consultation on a cap was always intended. Just not true. If she can stand in front of us and brazenly fib when seeking our support what else is she saying that we can't believe a word of. She is totally untrustworthy. What price a calamitous Brexit No Deal?

 

[SocketRocket]

What I'm finding difficult to understand is why after being warned repeatedly by experts that we risk becoming more and more vulnerable by cutting security services, she went ahead and done it anyway.

Her arrogance knows no bounds

You just dont want to understand why. Where would you cut public services if you had to do it, the country has a massive debt that is fed by public spending. How about taking out of public sector pensions, Social Housing, Welfare benefits, where would the cuts be made that would satisfy you and don't suggest they didn't need to be made.

Oh! and cutting MP's expenses wouldn't be the answer just in case that turns up.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

You just dont want to understand why. Where would you cut public services if you had to do it, the country has a massive debt that is fed by public spending. How about taking out of public sector pensions, Social Housing, Welfare benefits, where would the cuts be made that would satisfy you and don't suggest they didn't need to be made.

Take it out of MP's pay rises and cut their expenses or the overseas aid budget or increase taxes for everyone by a penny or chase after the tax dodgers or use the pot that they found to rescue the banks.

Health and Security of the nation should come first.

 

[SocketRocket]

Rubbish, they are simply another tool in her toolbox,
We won't see troops everytime the alert state goes to Critical.

Why was it done then, are you suggesting it was because we didnt have enough Police? You are being very simplistic in your condemnation IMO.

 

[richy]

You just dont want to understand why. Where would you cut public services if you had to do it, the country has a massive debt that is fed by public spending. How about taking out of public sector pensions, Social Housing, Welfare benefits, where would the cuts be made that would satisfy you and don't suggest they didn't need to be made.

Oh! and cutting MP's expenses wouldn't be the answer just in case that turns up.

Take it out of MP's pay rises and cut their expenses or the overseas aid budget or increase taxes for everyone by a penny or chase after the tax dodgers or use the pot that they found to rescue the banks.

Health and Security of the nation should come first.

Thanks Paul

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Why was it done then, are you suggesting it was because we didnt have enough Police? You are being very simplistic in your condemnation IMO.

If you listened or read the Government announcement then you would of heard or read that yes it was that simplistic, they put Troops on the streets in high profile areas to release police back to policeing, ie, they didn't have enough Police to provide adequate security to said places and carry on with other duties, therefore we either don't have enough Police or they are being mismanaged, which one do you think it was?

 

[Old Skier]

I would just like to remind everyone that using troops on the streets during levels of hieghten security is not a new thing. Late seventies I was regularly parked up at Heathrow in my little Scimitar.

 

[Old Skier]

don't have enough Police or they are being mismanaged, which one do you think it was?

Bit of both is the honest answer.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Bit of both is the honest answer.

Both still the responsibility of TM

 

[Old Skier]

Both still the responsibility of TM

Get the cops back on speeding tickets and let the boys have some fun

 

[richy]

Amazing scenes on the banks of the Tyne tonight. Thousands turn out to listen to Jeremy Corbyn.

 

[SocketRocket]

If you listened or read the Government announcement then you would of heard or read that yes it was that simplistic, they put Troops on the streets in high profile areas to release police back to policeing, ie, they didn't have enough Police to provide adequate security to said places and carry on with other duties, therefore we either don't have enough Police or they are being mismanaged, which one do you think it was?

I'm not sure if it was either of them. I have already explained why we saw Troops on the Street and why. If you wish to make some kind of anti Tory point score from it then that's your prerogative, I just don't subscribe to it. Police numbers have fallen and it's all part of the massive deficit created in 2010, painful cuts have been made to do something about it and if Labour are allowed to get into Government then all the hardship we have been through will be wasted as they will just borrow us into the same mess again.