Gordon is a Moron until......

[blazey]

As Gordon said he wouldn't resign even for the sake of the party, I'm putting my money on him hanging on until 2010. But I think the general election will surely be called before then? I don't know... hmm...

[SPUGGIE J]

He is going to hang on till the end in the hope a Maggie Thatcher style miracle will happen to allow him to return on a high crest of a wave.

[Eric]

If Gordon had any political savvy, he would have called a general election as soon as the economic crisis hit .... then he could happily have lost the election and have left the conservatives up fecal creek without a paddle.

However, given the present mess, he might as well hold on to the bitter end (by the way, the origin of that phrase is quite interesting).

[wadey]

The Telegraph has learned that the £13,000 that Miss Blears repaid voluntarily last month, in the wake of expenses disclosures about the sale of her flat in Kennington flat, south London, was to cover the sale proceeds of two of her designated 'second homes'.

A spokesman for Miss Blears confirmed that she had another previously sold property in Shad Thames, also in London, which she had designated as her second home for Commons allowances purposes, but which she had nominated as her main residence for capital gains tax purposes
Daily Telegraph 040609

[BERNADETTE]

Originally Posted by wadey

The Telegraph has learned that the £13,000 that Miss Blears repaid voluntarily last month, in the wake of expenses disclosures about the sale of her flat in Kennington flat, south London, was to cover the sale proceeds of two of her designated 'second homes'.

A spokesman for Miss Blears confirmed that she had another previously sold property in Shad Thames, also in London, which she had designated as her second home for Commons allowances purposes, but which she had nominated as her main residence for capital gains tax purposes
Daily Telegraph 040609

Is anybody surprised at the disclosures that are still coming to light? I for one am certainly not seeing as the consensus amongst certain MP's was to try and keep the truth under wraps till July. I think there will be more and more ridiculous claims come to light but all will be deemed to be "within the rules". Sorry it is a cop out for fraud as far as I am concerned and the sad thing is that these very people are still allowed to sit in parliment. It is a travesty of the trust put into these representatives IMHO

[Eric]

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

Is anybody surprised at the disclosures that are still coming to light? I for one am certainly not seeing as the consensus amongst certain MP's was to try and keep the truth under wraps till July. I think there will be more and more ridiculous claims come to light but all will be deemed to be "within the rules". Sorry it is a cop out for fraud as far as I am concerned and the sad thing is that these very people are still allowed to sit in parliment. It is a travesty of the trust put into these representatives IMHO

Raises the question: "How many people actually do trust politicians"? Your first sentence seems to suggest "NO" ...

[BERNADETTE]

Originally Posted by Eric

Raises the question: "How many people actually do trust politicians"? Your first sentence seems to suggest "NO" ...

Well no Eric after these disclosures I would be surprised if even the most ardent Labour/Tory or whatever party people support could say with all honesty that their trust was intact. The fact is they have been claiming ridiculous amounts of money but in their defence all they can come back with is "they weren't breaking any rules". Sorry but that doesn't wash with me and a lot of the electorate who are having to tighten their belts. As far as I'm concerned a lot of MP's (not all) are just extracting the urine because it was "within the rules". I wish the Freedom Of Information Act had come in sooner and then we might have had a full picture of how the country has been milked. But as it is most parties are implicated making it difficult to decide who to vote for as it seems a lot are there just for their own gain and sod the electorate

[Eric]

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

Well no Eric after these disclosures I would be surprised if even the most ardent Labour/Tory or whatever party people support could say with all honesty that their trust was intact. The fact is they have been claiming ridiculous amounts of money but in their defence all they can come back with is "they weren't breaking any rules". Sorry but that doesn't wash with me and a lot of the electorate who are having to tighten their belts. As far as I'm concerned a lot of MP's (not all) are just extracting the urine because it was "within the rules". I wish the Freedom Of Information Act had come in sooner and then we might have had a full picture of how the country has been milked. But as it is most parties are implicated making it difficult to decide who to vote for as it seems a lot are there just for their own gain and sod the electorate

Just a thought: can British MPs vote themselves salary increases as they do over here And, if they can and do, are those increases in line with what the peasants get

[steeljack]

a question for British voters .......when you go to the polls how are the ballot papers printed .......candidates name followed by Party ? , or Party followed by candidates name ?, and are the they jumbled up (in no alphabetical order , example here in California during a national ballot for say the US Senate the candidates are listed in a different order in my county than the next county , supposed to cut down on voter fraud ) .

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by Eric

Just a thought: can British MPs vote themselves salary increases as they do over here And, if they can and do, are those increases in line with what the peasants get

Unfortunately they do. There will be an end to that come the Christopher Kelly report later this year though.

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by steeljack

a question for British voters .......when you go to the polls how are the ballot papers printed .......candidates name followed by Party ? , or Party followed by candidates name ?, and are the they jumbled up (in no alphabetical order , example here in California during a national ballot for say the US Senate the candidates are listed in a different order in my county than the next county , supposed to cut down on voter fraud ) .

I think it's done alphabetically by party - I'll report back after I've been to cast my vote.

[grannyclaret]

ive been to the polling station this morning because i realy think you should use your vote,,,but i have deliberately spoiled my councill one.. in protest of the shady goings on
..but i HAVE voted in the big one

[Gayle]

I have voted. A choice of 13 parties for the Euro Election all listed alphabetical.
Then all the names of the candidates in that party listed underneath in the order that they would take a seat.

To try to explain - because it's proportional representation - each party fields a number of candidates and they can specify the order that they are listed in. Then when the votes are counted it is determined how many candidates from each party gets in - this is done proportionally so for example, if it is decided that three candidates are elected from the Green Party then the first three candidates on their list will get in.

I noticed that Nick Griffin was No. 1 candidate for the BNP.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by grannyclaret

ive been to the polling station this morning because i realy think you should use your vote,,,but i have deliberately spoiled my councill one.. in protest of the shady goings on
..but i HAVE voted in the big one

What shady goings on are happening at your Council?

[grannyclaret]

Originally Posted by Neil

What shady goings on are happening at your Council?

i am talking about the general shady goings on,,,i have always voted labour ,but i have never ever been so dismayed,,,all the counsellors and M P s need a kick up the backside