Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tariffs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
And this is the fallacy of the 'lets nationalise it to get cheaper prices'.
The first effect of nationalisation would be that all the cheap deals would disappear.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without.
Similarly, when making a rail journey, exploring whether splitting the journey into two or three separate segments is cheaper than booking the whole trip or - as in the case of a journey I make regularly - whether booking a longer trip starting from a station further back along the line is cheaper than the shorter trip starting from where I will actually board the train - is just annoying and pointless hassle.
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without.
Similarly, when making a rail journey, exploring whether splitting the journey into two or three separate segments is cheaper than booking the whole trip or - as in the case of a journey I make regularly - whether booking a longer trip starting from a station further back along the line is cheaper than the shorter trip starting from where I will actually board the train - is just annoying and pointless hassle.
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Most people I know save about 30% by their first swap. Worth having.
Moneysavingexpert also have an excellent service in this area.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
I don’t get why someone would look at porn at work. You’re just asking for trouble there. It’s much easier to just do it in your own time, I’m not quite sure why some can’t just leaving it at that.
Well the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 was going through the Commons then, so accessing porn might have been done for research purposes of that.
I wondered if that might have been involved.
Sadly Damian Green ruined that plan with his original vehement denial of no porn on his computer.
He was Shadow Home Office Minister at the time so he'd have an extra plausible reason to do research on Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
Exactly. They could just be using the time to view porn....
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tariffs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
And this is the fallacy of the 'lets nationalise it to get cheaper prices'.
The first effect of nationalisation would be that all the cheap deals would disappear.
More likely, the government would use nationalised utilities as cash cows.
I don’t get why someone would look at porn at work. You’re just asking for trouble there. It’s much easier to just do it in your own time, I’m not quite sure why some can’t just leaving it at that.
Well the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 was going through the Commons then, so accessing porn might have been done for research purposes of that.
Clearly you missed your vocation as a defence barrister?
If only your client had been sharp enough to offer up this explanation voluntarily.
Well what do you expect from someone who read PPE at Oxford, they've not experienced real life.
Yep, choosing Oxford over Cambridge is a mistake from which you never recover
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
If so, then the failed offerings will be driven out by the market mechanism.
Regular switching is not difficult, and people who choose not to do so are perfectly free to make that choice. It is still no reason to wreck it by nationalisation.
I don’t get why someone would look at porn at work. You’re just asking for trouble there. It’s much easier to just do it in your own time, I’m not quite sure why some can’t just leaving it at that.
Well the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 was going through the Commons then, so accessing porn might have been done for research purposes of that.
I wondered if that might have been involved.
Sadly Damian Green ruined that plan with his original vehement denial of no porn on his computer.
He was Shadow Home Office Minister at the time so he'd have an extra plausible reason to do research on Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
There wasn't any porn on his computer. There is just an allegation of it, which I'm pretty sure would be inadmissible evidence in a court as illegally obtained, and as such should be treated as if it were a fabrication. Which it could well be.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
If so, then the failed offerings will be driven out by the market mechanism.
Regular switching is not difficult, and people who choose not to do so are perfectly free to make that choice. It is still no reason to wreck it by nationalisation.
Excellent thing, free markets.
Well, it seems that Igloo.com will be getting my custom come January.
I don’t get why someone would look at porn at work. You’re just asking for trouble there. It’s much easier to just do it in your own time, I’m not quite sure why some can’t just leaving it at that.
Well the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 was going through the Commons then, so accessing porn might have been done for research purposes of that.
I wondered if that might have been involved.
Sadly Damian Green ruined that plan with his original vehement denial of no porn on his computer.
He was Shadow Home Office Minister at the time so he'd have an extra plausible reason to do research on Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
Maybe Green was thinking about porn for personal use.
Though if he had been doing any research work into extreme porn at the time it wouldn't be surprising if his computer got contaminated with some without his knowledge and without having visited any sites.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
Actually, that is quite patronising. How do you know that lower income people do not take advantage?
I concur with your view Nigelb. As David says, under these circumstances it isn't a sackable offence. Nor, in this case, do I think it appropriate for ex-Policemen to comment on what was found at that time. It does have the feel of Plebgate to it. Green shouldn't have done what is alleged on a work's computer but I'm afraid it reinforces my opinion of most politicians as individuals who are out of touch with the real world and I'll leave it at that.
In the real world, virtually everyone lies about sex and virtually everyone watches porn. And I wouldn't believe those that said they didn't.
Next.
I've never watched porn on a computer (it's just too sad)
You've bought mags, then?
No. That's sad too. My vivid imagination is good enough for me.
Good for you but it's not unusual for others, men or women, though more common for men. And are we including literary porn. Not always about image.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
Actually, that is quite patronising. How do you know that lower income people do not take advantage?
The charities and lobbying groups that are active in this area all hold this view. And i know from my own family that my older relatives don't even think of spending the time on comparison websites that my younger relatives do.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
A Corbyn Govt. would be very bad news for comparethemarket.com
Will nobody think of the poor meerkats? Heartless bastard, that Jeremy Corbyn.....
On topic, this is absolutely right. The porn doesn't matter, but the power games involved matter a lot.
Relatedly, British MPs have created a huge trap for themselves in the form of a thing called the Digital Economy Act, which requires age verification to view porn. Age verification is going to be done by making individuals put their personal information into databases controlled by various private corporations.
The upshot is that whoever owns, buys or hacks these databases will have access to embarrassing secrets about politicians, police and judges.
That’s a right old mess. No matter what government tries to do, they’re never going to stop teenage boys finding imaginative ways of getting internet porn.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tariffs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
And this is the fallacy of the 'lets nationalise it to get cheaper prices'.
The first effect of nationalisation would be that all the cheap deals would disappear.
More likely, the government would use nationalised utilities as cash cows.
It would be LOL time when those people who thought that nationalisation would bring cheaper bills got price rises instead.
Though the second thing that would happen, after the disappearence of the cheap deals, would be demands for pay rises from everyone employed in the nationalised industries.
I concur with your view Nigelb. As David says, under these circumstances it isn't a sackable offence. Nor, in this case, do I think it appropriate for ex-Policemen to comment on what was found at that time. It does have the feel of Plebgate to it. Green shouldn't have done what is alleged on a work's computer but I'm afraid it reinforces my opinion of most politicians as individuals who are out of touch with the real world and I'll leave it at that.
In the real world, virtually everyone lies about sex and virtually everyone watches porn. And I wouldn't believe those that said they didn't.
Next.
I've never watched porn on a computer (it's just too sad)
You've bought mags, then?
No. That's sad too. My vivid imagination is good enough for me.
Good for you but it's not unusual for others, men or women, though more common for men. And are we including literary porn. Not always about image.
And are we including, for example, fan-fiction - written romnatic fiction / erotica which has more of a female authorship / audience?
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
Actually, that is quite patronising. How do you know that lower income people do not take advantage?
The charities and lobbying groups that are active in this area all hold this view. And i know from my own family that my older relatives don't even think of spending the time on comparison websites that my younger relatives do.
i would be genuinely interested in seeing a link to the argument they make.
I concur with your view Nigelb. As David says, under these circumstances it isn't a sackable offence. Nor, in this case, do I think it appropriate for ex-Policemen to comment on what was found at that time. It does have the feel of Plebgate to it. Green shouldn't have done what is alleged on a work's computer but I'm afraid it reinforces my opinion of most politicians as individuals who are out of touch with the real world and I'll leave it at that.
In the real world, virtually everyone lies about sex and virtually everyone watches porn. And I wouldn't believe those that said they didn't.
Next.
I've never watched porn on a computer (it's just too sad)
You've bought mags, then?
No. That's sad too. My vivid imagination is good enough for me.
Good for you but it's not unusual for others, men or women, though more common for men. And are we including literary porn. Not always about image.
And are we including, for example, fan-fiction - written romnatic fiction / erotica which has more of a female authorship / audience?
It serves a similar purpose so I don't know why not.
On topic, this is absolutely right. The porn doesn't matter, but the power games involved matter a lot.
Relatedly, British MPs have created a huge trap for themselves in the form of a thing called the Digital Economy Act, which requires age verification to view porn. Age verification is going to be done by making individuals put their personal information into databases controlled by various private corporations.
The upshot is that whoever owns, buys or hacks these databases will have access to embarrassing secrets about politicians, police and judges.
That’s a right old mess. No matter what government tries to do, they’re never going to stop teenage boys finding imaginative ways of getting internet porn.
Yup, the only positive aspect to it is that it helps educate young people in the use of useful technology like Tor and VPNs.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
You are talking about retailing electricity. Most providers (e.g. Sainsbury Energy) buy wholesale (using their buying power) and sell retail with as much confusion as possible to make a margin. It's like retailing petrol but more confusing.
The Labour manifesto policy on energy nationalisation is "to ensure that national and regional grid infrastructure is brought into public ownership over time”. This is different from retailing. It is about power lines and power stations. This is a subsidised monopoly of strategic importance like roads, railway lines, water reservoirs and pipelines, armies and navies, where true competition is impossible, extremely expensive or very undesirable.
Labour policy on energy retailing is very similar to Tory policy - cap prices and simplify tariffs.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
The CEGB ran power stations; it did not sell directly -- that was the job of regional electricity boards such as the LEB (London) and so on. In any case, what now is the customer choosing between? Only tariffs, not the cables it comes down, should your supply prove unreliable. And can the green customer choose between electricity from Scottish bird-blenders or French atoms?
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
Actually, that is quite patronising. How do you know that lower income people do not take advantage?
The charities and lobbying groups that are active in this area all hold this view. And i know from my own family that my older relatives don't even think of spending the time on comparison websites that my younger relatives do.
i would be genuinely interested in seeing a link to the argument they make.
Both Conservatives and Labour are now proposing to cap the excesses of energy pricing. What more evidence that the privatised market isn't acting in the interests of all consumers do you need?
On topic, this is absolutely right. The porn doesn't matter, but the power games involved matter a lot.
Relatedly, British MPs have created a huge trap for themselves in the form of a thing called the Digital Economy Act, which requires age verification to view porn. Age verification is going to be done by making individuals put their personal information into databases controlled by various private corporations.
The upshot is that whoever owns, buys or hacks these databases will have access to embarrassing secrets about politicians, police and judges.
That’s a right old mess. No matter what government tries to do, they’re never going to stop teenage boys finding imaginative ways of getting internet porn.
Yup, the only positive aspect to it is that it helps educate young people in the use of useful technology like Tor and VPNs.
Indeed so. Governments trying to uninvent technology they don’t like never works and has never worked, a lesson the Americans learned in the 1920s. Ditto encryption.
It’ll only take a couple of years before everyone is using an encrypted device to access https sites through a VPN, and then the government will find they’ve got nothing on anyone, the legislation the security services demanded doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they can vote for Corbyn Labour who are committed to that policy, Tories are not going to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility company to get f*cked over by?
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without.
Similarly, when making a rail journey, exploring whether splitting the journey into two or three separate segments is cheaper than booking the whole trip or - as in the case of a journey I make regularly - whether booking a longer trip starting from a station further back along the line is cheaper than the shorter trip starting from where I will actually board the train - is just annoying and pointless hassle.
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Have I been living in some parallel universe where watching and saving porn on a work computer is normally a firing offense?
I hope you live in a country where being accused of doing so a decade ago by bent cops with a grudge isn't a firing offence.
Of course. If there turns out to be no credible evidence, he shouldn't be fired. But I don't understand this "it's just porn, who cares?" attitude
Every single job I've worked in, private & public sector, looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, fired. If ten years later it's discovered that I had been looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, and I was still in the same job, fired.
You can argue as to whether that's proportional or not, and I accept that it's still moot whether Green did it and that the 2 ex coppers' actions aint unimpeachable. However it's an unbreakable rule that saying that it's different for our elected members compared to the average punter 'because reasons' is a crap look for pols & their partisans.
On topic, this is absolutely right. The porn doesn't matter, but the power games involved matter a lot.
Relatedly, British MPs have created a huge trap for themselves in the form of a thing called the Digital Economy Act, which requires age verification to view porn. Age verification is going to be done by making individuals put their personal information into databases controlled by various private corporations.
The upshot is that whoever owns, buys or hacks these databases will have access to embarrassing secrets about politicians, police and judges.
That’s a right old mess. No matter what government tries to do, they’re never going to stop teenage boys finding imaginative ways of getting internet porn.
Yup, the only positive aspect to it is that it helps educate young people in the use of useful technology like Tor and VPNs.
Indeed so. Governments trying to uninvent technology they don’t like never works and has never worked, a lesson the Americans learned in the 1920s. Ditto encryption.
It’ll only take a couple of years before everyone is using an encrypted device to access https sites through a VPN, and then the government will find they’ve got nothing on anyone, the legislation the security services demanded doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot.
The security services have now started to crack VPNs, they are not guaranteed anonymity all the time
Have I been living in some parallel universe where watching and saving porn on a work computer is normally a firing offense?
I hope you live in a country where being accused of doing so a decade ago by bent cops with a grudge isn't a firing offence.
Of course. If there turns out to be no credible evidence, he shouldn't be fired. But I don't understand this "it's just porn, who cares?" attitude
Every single job I've worked in, private & public sector, looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, fired. If ten years later it's discovered that I had been looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, and I was still in the same job, fired.
You can argue as to whether that's proportional or not, and I accept that it's still moot whether Green did it and that the 2 ex coppers' actions aint unimpeachable. However it's an unbreakable rule that saying that it's different for our elected members compared to the average punter 'because reasons' is a crap look for pols & their partisans.
Except it is different. If they are sentenced to less than a year in jail MPs can't be sacked even if they are a convicted criminal. Yes people don't like accepting some things are different for the elected, and most things aren't, but it is what it is.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they g to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility s. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity er the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op ke any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
You are talking about retailing electricity. Most providers (e.g. Sainsbury Energy) buy wholesale (using their buying power) and sell retail with as much confusion as possible to make a margin. It's like retailing petrol but more confusing.
The Labour manifesto policy on energy nationalisation is "to ensure that national and regional grid infrastructure is brought into public ownership over time”. This is different from retailing. It is about power lines and power stations. This is a subsidised monopoly of strategic importance like roads, railway lines, water reservoirs and pipelines, armies and navies, where true competition is impossible, extremely expensive or very undesirable.
Labour policy on energy retailing is very similar to Tory policy - cap prices and simplify tariffs.
When you put it like that it sounds reasonable, though someone will probably explain I'm silly to think that. On such issues I'm very open to persuasion though.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Have I been living in some parallel universe where watching and saving porn on a work computer is normally a firing offense?
I hope you live in a country where being accused of doing so a decade ago by bent cops with a grudge isn't a firing offence.
Of course. If there turns out to be no credible evidence, he shouldn't be fired. But I don't understand this "it's just porn, who cares?" attitude
Every single job I've worked in, private & public sector, looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, fired. If ten years later it's discovered that I had been looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, and I was still in the same job, fired.
You can argue as to whether that's proportional or not, and I accept that it's still moot whether Green did it and that the 2 ex coppers' actions aint unimpeachable. However it's an unbreakable rule that saying that it's different for our elected members compared to the average punter 'because reasons' is a crap look for pols & their partisans.
Ten years ago, I'd be surprised if an employee got fired.
The thing is, that it is different for elected representatives. The voters get the chance to give them the boot, every few years, but they don't have employers. If the voters are outraged by an elected representative viewing porn, they can vote him out.
Think about capital investment and competing interests in government. If there X funds and the choices are schools and hospitals or the grid, where do you think it will go?
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without.
Similarly, when making a rail journey, exploring whether splitting the journey into two or three separate segments is cheaper than booking the whole trip or - as in the case of a journey I make regularly - whether booking a longer trip starting from a station further back along the line is cheaper than the shorter trip starting from where I will actually board the train - is just annoying and pointless hassle.
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket at a straightforward price, lower than ours, for a journey that most of the time will be comfortable and reliable. Why should British passengers have to spend an hour on the internet researching myriad permutations just to obtain a ticket that even then probably costs twice as much per mile as those European journeys?
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
y.
That is most peoples experience of utility companies. The right think they can shrug their shoulders. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Its so that the supplier can make a profit.
On some of the tarrifs and with some of its customers there wont be any profit and with others there will be lots.
The 'clever' customers who regularly switch to cheaper deals and make use of cashback sites are effectively getting subsidised by the lazy / stupid / loyal customers who are getting ripped off.
Ditto with insurance, airlines, supermarkets.
Clearly. The social benefit of all this is negative, however, and the time spent dreaming up all this complexity simply wasted effort and cost.
Actually, that is quite patronising. How do you know that lower income people do not take advantage?
The charities and lobbying groups that are active in this area all hold this view. And i know from my own family that my older relatives don't even think of spending the time on comparison websites that my younger relatives do.
i would be genuinely interested in seeing a link to the argument they make.
Both Conservatives and Labour are now proposing to cap the excesses of energy pricing. What more evidence that the privatised market isn't acting in the interests of all consumers do you need?
And Ofgem just last month said: We share the government’s concern that the market is not working for all consumers, especially the vulnerable
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
Have I been living in some parallel universe where watching and saving porn on a work computer is normally a firing offense?
I hope you live in a country where being accused of doing so a decade ago by bent cops with a grudge isn't a firing offence.
Of course. If there turns out to be no credible evidence, he shouldn't be fired. But I don't understand this "it's just porn, who cares?" attitude
Every single job I've worked in, private & public sector, looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, fired. If ten years later it's discovered that I had been looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, and I was still in the same job, fired.
You can argue as to whether that's proportional or not, and I accept that it's still moot whether Green did it and that the 2 ex coppers' actions aint unimpeachable. However it's an unbreakable rule that saying that it's different for our elected members compared to the average punter 'because reasons' is a crap look for pols & their partisans.
Except it is different. If they are sentenced to less than a year in jail MPs can't be sacked even if they are a convicted criminal. Yes people don't like accepting some things are different for the elected, and most things aren't, but it is what it is.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they g to deny them a choice of energy company.
A choice of which utility s. They can't.
It's a political problem that resonates widely - with a simple, sensible solution.
At least with different electricity er the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op ke any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
You are talking about retailing electricity. Most providers (e.g. Sainsbury Energy) buy wholesale (using their buying power) and sell retail with as much confusion as possible to make a margin. It's like retailing petrol but more confusing.
The Labour manifesto policy on energy nationalisation is "to ensure that national and regional grid infrastructure is brought into public ownership over time”. This is different from retailing. It is about power lines and power stations. This is a subsidised monopoly of strategic importance like roads, railway lines, water reservoirs and pipelines, armies and navies, where true competition is impossible, extremely expensive or very undesirable.
Labour policy on energy retailing is very similar to Tory policy - cap prices and simplify tariffs.
When you put it like that it sounds reasonable, though someone will probably explain I'm silly to think that. On such issues I'm very open to persuasion though.
The issue of nationalisation is the politics of management - that investment in infrastructure has to compete with skoolz’n’ospitals for the Chancellor’s attention, along with the willingness of workers to unionise and strike. Also the lack of competition leading to degraded service and the organisations being run for the benefit of the staff rather than the customer. I’d go with better regulation such as standardised tariff sheets, monopolies have been proven not to work.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without.
Similarly, when making a rail journey, exploring whether splitting the journey into two or three separate segments is cheaper than booking the whole trip or - as in the case of a journey I make regularly - whether booking a longer trip starting from a station further back along the line is cheaper than the shorter trip starting from where I will actually board the train - is just annoying and pointless hassle.
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket at a straightforward price, lower than ours, for a journey that most of the time will be comfortable and reliable. Why should British passengers have to spend an hour on the internet researching myriad permutations just to obtain a ticket that even then probably costs twice as much per mile as those European journeys?
If you’re talking pricing you’ve clearly rarely travelled Intercity with DB or SNCF.
Have I been living in some parallel universe where watching and saving porn on a work computer is normally a firing offense?
I hope you live in a country where being accused of doing so a decade ago by bent cops with a grudge isn't a firing offence.
Of course. If there turns out to be no credible evidence, he shouldn't be fired. But I don't understand this "it's just porn, who cares?" attitude
Every single job I've worked in, private & public sector, looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, fired. If ten years later it's discovered that I had been looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, and I was still in the same job, fired.
You can argue as to whether that's proportional or not, and I accept that it's still moot whether Green did it and that the 2 ex coppers' actions aint unimpeachable. However it's an unbreakable rule that saying that it's different for our elected members compared to the average punter 'because reasons' is a crap look for pols & their partisans.
Ten years ago, I'd be surprised if an employee got fired.
The thing is, that it is different for elected representatives. The voters get the chance to give them the boot, every few years, but they don't have employers. If the voters are outraged by an elected representative viewing porn, they can vote him out.
Bullsh*t. In all but the most extreme cases, whether an MP keeps or loses their seat depends on national swing, from which very many of them are almost entirely insulated under our absurd voting system.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket at a straightforward price, lower than ours, for a journey that most of the time will be comfortable and reliable. Why should British passengers have to spend an hour on the internet researching myriad permutations just to obtain a ticket that even then probably costs twice as much per mile as those European journeys?
When I go to visit family on the Isle of Wight, it is about £50 cheaper to buy a ticket to Portsmouth Harbour, then a separate ferry ticket, then a ticket on the Island line, than an inclusive ticket.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At leastit.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without.
Similarly, when making a rail journey, exploring whether splitting the journey into two or three separate segments is cheaper than booking the whole trip or - as in the case of a journey I make regularly - whether booking a longer trip starting from a station further back along the line is cheaper than the shorter trip starting from where I will actually board the train - is just annoying and pointless hassle.
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket at a straightforward price, lower than ours, for a journey that most of the time will be comfortable and reliable. Why should British passengers have to spend an hour on the internet researching myriad permutations just to obtain a ticket that even then probably costs twice as much per mile as those European journeys?
If you’re talking pricing you’ve clearly rarely travelled Intercity with DB or SNCF.
I have, but to be honest not so much in recent years. Have things changed? (Comparing prices at pre-referendum exchange rates)
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket at a straightforward price, lower than ours, for a journey that most of the time will be comfortable and reliable. Why should British passengers have to spend an hour on the internet researching myriad permutations just to obtain a ticket that even then probably costs twice as much per mile as those European journeys?
When I go to visit family on the Isle of Wight, it is about £50 cheaper to buy a ticket to Portsmouth Harbour, then a separate ferry ticket, then a ticket on the Island line, than an inclusive ticket.
It is bonkers in its needless complexity.
Although you'll also find a significant saving (sometimes as much as 50%) if you book the inclusive ticket to Ryde St Johns rather than just to Ryde Pierhead. Equally bonkers to charge double for a shorter advance ticket journey.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket
When I go to visit family on the Isle of Wight, it is about £50 cheaper to buy a ticket to Portsmouth Harbour, then a separate ferry ticket, then a ticket on the Island line, than an inclusive ticket.
It is bonkers in its needless complexity.
Although you'll also find a significant saving (sometimes as much as 50%) if you book the inclusive ticket to Ryde St Johns rather than just to Ryde Pierhead.
QED!
I have travelled that route for years and haven't spotted that wrinkle.
Have I been living in some parallel universe where watching and saving porn on a work computer is normally a firing offense?
I hope you live in a country where being accused of doing so a decade ago by bent cops with a grudge isn't a firing offence.
Of course. If there turns out to be no credible evidence, he shouldn't be fired. But I don't understand this "it's just porn, who cares?" attitude
Every single job I've worked in, private & public sector, looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, fired. If ten years later it's discovered that I had been looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, and I was still in the same job, fired.
You can argue as to whether that's proportional or not, and I accept that it's still moot whether Green did it and that the 2 ex coppers' actions aint unimpeachable. However it's an unbreakable rule that saying that it's different for our elected members compared to the average punter 'because reasons' is a crap look for pols & their partisans.
Ten years ago, I'd be surprised if an employee got fired.
The thing is, that it is different for elected representatives. The voters get the chance to give them the boot, every few years, but they don't have employers. If the voters are outraged by an elected representative viewing porn, they can vote him out.
Bullsh*t. In all but the most extreme cases, whether an MP keeps or loses their seat depends on national swing, from which very many of them are almost entirely insulated under our absurd voting system.
Meaning that the voters are pretty tolerant of behaviour which is not outrageous. Mostly, though, MP's who are likely to get voted out and/or deselected will stand down.
@IanB2 , in my experience walk-on IC fares are little different in Germany or the UK. The prebooking airline model you see in the UK is actually significantly cheaper.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
On topic, this is absolutely right. The porn doesn't matter, but the power games involved matter a lot.
Relatedly, British MPs have created a huge trap for themselves in the form of a thing called the Digital Economy Act, which requires age verification to view porn. Age verification is going to be done by making individuals put their personal information into databases controlled by various private corporations.
The upshot is that whoever owns, buys or hacks these databases will have access to embarrassing secrets about politicians, police and judges.
That’s a right old mess. No matter what government tries to do, they’re never going to stop teenage boys finding imaginative ways of getting internet porn.
Yup, the only positive aspect to it is that it helps educate young people in the use of useful technology like Tor and VPNs.
Indeed so. Governments trying to uninvent technology they don’t like never works and has never worked, a lesson the Americans learned in the 1920s. Ditto encryption.
It’ll only take a couple of years before everyone is using an encrypted device to access https sites through a VPN, and then the government will find they’ve got nothing on anyone, the legislation the security services demanded doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot.
If someone has the choice of handing their identity to a porn site (for potential identity theft and/or blackmail) or learning to proxy their requests via another country, which will they choose?
This anti-porn law (which seems more a land grab by the BBFC as much as anything) is up there with the EU Cookies directive in the stupidity stakes.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
And Ofgem just last month said: We share the government’s concern that the market is not working for all consumers, especially the vulnerable
Clearly, they just need a "vulnerables" tariff, where you simply sign up by saying that you are "vulnerable".
Could we have a league table of “vulnerable” (or “most vulnerable”)? If the Times letters page over the last month is to be believed, it might be quicker to compile a list of those who aren’t vulnerable (net taxpayers perhaps).
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
And if, say, the complaint against a "seedy old man" should prove to have something to do with the thwarted ambition of the accuser, seeing their chance of getting selected for his seat slipping away....? Would the accuser's actions then count as sordid too?
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
If people want to nationalise energy companies they g to deny them a choice of energy company.
You are talking about retailing electricity. Most providers (e.g. Sainsbury Energy) buy wholesale (using their buying power) and sell retail with as much confusion as possible to make a margin. It's like retailing petrol but more confusing.
The Labour manifesto policy on energy nationalisation is "to ensure that national and regional grid infrastructure is brought into public ownership over time”. This is different from retailing. It is about power lines and power stations. This is a subsidised monopoly of strategic importance like roads, railway lines, water reservoirs and pipelines, armies and navies, where true competition is impossible, extremely expensive or very undesirable.
Labour policy on energy retailing is very similar to Tory policy - cap prices and simplify tariffs.
When you put it like that it sounds reasonable, though someone will probably explain I'm silly to think that. On such issues I'm very open to persuasion though.
The issue of nationalisation is the politics of management - that investment in infrastructure has to compete with skoolz’n’ospitals for the Chancellor’s attention, along with the willingness of workers to unionise and strike. Also the lack of competition leading to degraded service and the organisations being run for the benefit of the staff rather than the customer. I’d go with better regulation such as standardised tariff sheets, monopolies have been proven not to work.
1. Capital for investment in infrastructure can be borrowed at low rates, return much more than the cost of capital and put as an asset on the other side of the balance sheet (like the Government did with student debt).
2. Ask Southern Rail about strikes in the private sector (and customer satisfaction).
3. When Thatcher first mooted privatisation of the utilities, the top management were up in arms against it until it was pointed out to them that their remuneration should match the private sector. Suddenly their opposition vanished and over a couple of years, their remuneration quadrupled.
When I go to visit family on the Isle of Wight, it is about £50 cheaper to buy a ticket to Portsmouth Harbour, then a separate ferry ticket, then a ticket on the Island line, than an inclusive ticket.
It is bonkers in its needless complexity.
I'm quite enjoying this discussion - it's as if people think that the old BR just sold flat fares for everything. They didn't. Your anecdote could have been written in the 1970s or 1980s as much as today.
Yes, fares have become more complex, but the complexity used to be hidden because few knew about the best ways to get cheap fares. Now, with t'Internet and companies actually wanting to get passengers, they're much more obvious.
I also think you're mistaken if you think fares will become simple. They won't, for several reasons. Fares increase and decrease in line with usage: you want to promote use using cheaper fares out of busy times, etc, etc. Then there are the routing restrictions (e.g. the 'not via London') that lead to different classes of tickets, and other factors such as Young Persons Railcard and equivalents.
Basically: pricing on a complex network such as the railways is a naturally complex beast. It's probably too complex atm, but the idea that it was ever simple is laughable. You just didn't get to see the complexities because they were hidden from you.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
Think what you like.
I think that the defences of viewing porn at work that we have seen on here and your extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety are rather more depressing.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At leas privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately thousands of tariffs from multiple suppliers) is a choice I could do without The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket
When I go to visit family on the Isle of Wight, it is about £50 cheaper to buy a ticket to Portsmouth Harbour, then a separate ferry ticket, then a ticket on the Island line, than an inclusive ticket.
It is bonkers in its needless complexity.
Although you'll also find a significant saving (sometimes as much as 50%) if you book the inclusive ticket to Ryde St Johns rather than just to Ryde Pierhead.
QED!
I have travelled that route for years and haven't spotted that wrinkle.
Searching just this minute for a single next Saturday London Waterloo to Ryde pier on national rail at 1330, the price is £44.10. Get the same train from Waterloo with a ticket through to Ryde St Johns - a longer trip - is £20.40.
And, amazingly, leaving Merseyside Waterloo at the same time bound for Ryde - which I searched for by mistake the first time - via London including the tube journey Euston to Waterloo - will cost just £44.30!
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
Think what you like.
I think that the defences of viewing porn at work that we have seen on here and your extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety are rather more depressing.
My "extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety"?!?! You colossal pervert. I'm talking about the disgraceful actions of bent cops and the state broadcaster. And you're dribbling away about fictional pornography.
I wish people would stop assuming that if the government falls then it will be handing Jeremy Corbyn the keys to No.10. Labour's lead in the polls is about a third of what it was in July, a month after the election. I wouldn't underestimate the Tories' scope for running a successful campaign this time after they screwed up so badly in June. They couldn't do it under Theresa May of course, who may well lose two more cabinet ministers tomorrow (Damian Green and David Davis), but under a new leader they might. The one who comes to mind is Jacob Rees-Mogg, precisely the contender who is outside the cabinet and not so associated with perceived government incompetence as those who are in it. You've got to wonder whether those who dislike him (a minority) would like to see him get a big cabinet portfolio as soon as possible.
That said, it would be best for the country if the Tories could continue their pro and anti "Europe" in-fighting in opposition rather than in government.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
How is it illegally obtained?
It flowed from an authorised search warrant that included checking Damian Green's offices, houses, and property therein such as computers?
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
How is it illegally obtained?
It flowed from an authorised search warrant that included checking Damian Green's offices, houses, and property therein such as computers?
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
How is it illegally obtained?
It flowed from an authorised search warrant that included checking Damian Green's offices, houses, and property therein such as computers?
Because it is police property and has been illegitimately retained by the person pursuing the accusation?
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
"Asked about the peer's [Rennard's] future position, Sir Vince, who took over as party leader in July, said: "He has no role whatever advising me or as a spokesman for the party - and I have no intention of going down that road."
Asked by Emma Barnett on BBC Radio 5 live if Lord Rennard could return to the front bench in future, he replied: "No. I've ruled that out, where I'm concerned."
He added: "He clearly is the focus of a great deal of critical comment. I want the party to move on… I don't want every conversation to go back to what happened 10 years ago with him."
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
Yes, he’s certainly a good organiser of campaigns, I know he was the man behind a lot of the by-election wins over a couple of decades but that doesn’t excuse his behaviour.
At the risk of stretching the point, Jimmy Savile raised millions for charity too, it didn’t excuse him from being a pervert.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
Yes, he’s certainly a good organiser of campaigns, I know he was the man behind a lot of the by-election wins over a couple of decades but that doesn’t excuse his behaviour.
At the risk of stretching the point, Jimmy Savile raised millions for charity too, it didn’t excuse him from being a pervert.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
Yes, he’s certainly a good organiser of campaigns, I know he was the man behind a lot of the by-election wins over a couple of decades but that doesn’t excuse his behaviour.
At the risk of stretching the point, Jimmy Savile raised millions for charity too, it didn’t excuse him from being a pervert.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
How is it illegally obtained?
It flowed from an authorised search warrant that included checking Damian Green's offices, houses, and property therein such as computers?
Given how much you appear to enjoy everything that causes Mrs May difficulty, I suspect you might be enjoying this too. Are you a pervert?
Yours is the 1st comment, and I agree. But I'd like to think (should it have occurred) it was done during one's lunch hour.
This kind of nonsense makes me think of Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter".
I am trudging through that at the moment.
And "trudging" is the right term.
40 pages to describe the building and the occupants of the building in which he found the (fictitious) old notes on which he claimed to base the story.,.
Ha. Believe it or not we read it in school, about 1955. The basic idea certainly broadened our horizons.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
How is it illegally obtained?
It flowed from an authorised search warrant that included checking Damian Green's offices, houses, and property therein such as computers?
It was ordered to be destroyed.
Indeed, why did he disobey a direct instruction to destroy it? Surely that must be illegal and anything that flows from it is as the Americans say now "fruit of the poisonous tree".
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
"Asked about the peer's [Rennard's] future position, Sir Vince, who took over as party leader in July, said: "He has no role whatever advising me or as a spokesman for the party - and I have no intention of going down that road."
Asked by Emma Barnett on BBC Radio 5 live if Lord Rennard could return to the front bench in future, he replied: "No. I've ruled that out, where I'm concerned."
He added: "He clearly is the focus of a great deal of critical comment. I want the party to move on… I don't want every conversation to go back to what happened 10 years ago with him."
Yours is the 1st comment, and I agree. But I'd like to think (should it have occurred) it was done during one's lunch hour.
This kind of nonsense makes me think of Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter".
I am trudging through that at the moment.
And "trudging" is the right term.
40 pages to describe the building and the occupants of the building in which he found the (fictitious) old notes on which he claimed to base the story.,.
Ha. Believe it or not we read it in school, about 1955. The basic idea certainly broadened our horizons.
Come to think of it, as a teenager I found "Gormenghast" a more entertaining building.
Given how much you appear to enjoy everything that causes Mrs May difficulty, I suspect you might be enjoying this too. Are you a pervert?
Perverted is in the eye of the beholder, and well if you get it in their eyes...
I’m on Team Anti Rozzer, always have been, especially Bob Quick.
The Fuzz have treated Damian Green shamefully for a decade.
Good to hear.
"The former detective, who spent 25 years with the Met, said after the leaks inquiry ended he was ordered by the force to delete the data on the computer copies he had made." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42151148
Because it is police property and has been illegitimately retained by the person pursuing the accusation?
Do you have link to that please chaps?
I can do my own thinking on property ownership and creation during the course of employment. I don’t require a validation link. As a lawyer nor should you.
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
"Seedy old men"
The recent sex scandals in all parties (and I specifically cited Rennard in my party) are pretty dispiriting in the seedy actions of older men. It is all rather sordid, but no party seems immune.
What dirt has Chris Rennard got on other senior LDs? That’s the question I keep asking myself, there much be a really good reason that Cable wants to stop his party from taking a moral high ground on this issue, which they can’t do when one of their own problem dirty old men keeps reappearing.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
"Asked about the peer's [Rennard's] future position, Sir Vince, who took over as party leader in July, said: "He has no role whatever advising me or as a spokesman for the party - and I have no intention of going down that road."
Asked by Emma Barnett on BBC Radio 5 live if Lord Rennard could return to the front bench in future, he replied: "No. I've ruled that out, where I'm concerned."
He added: "He clearly is the focus of a great deal of critical comment. I want the party to move on… I don't want every conversation to go back to what happened 10 years ago with him."
I think that those enjoying this perversion of justice are far bigger perverts than those that watch legal porn. I reckon @foxinsoxuk is proving himself to be a massive pervert today.
I have criticised the cops, not called for any sackings or resignations and stated that I am happy for the Cabinet Office to investigate by due process.
Mine is possibly the most tame mannered perverted lynch mob ever. @foxinsoxuk is Born to be Mild.
Now the Rugby League is over, I need to tend to my poorly pooch. The old fellow looks as if he is fading away.
You've mildly criticised the cops, while simultaneously defending them with the "public interest" crap. And you've gone straight into whataboutery with your list of others wronged, and implied that you think it's about time it happened to a Tory. You are enjoying this.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
Think what you like.
I think that the defences of viewing porn at work that we have seen on here and your extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety are rather more depressing.
My "extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety"?!?! You colossal pervert. I'm talking about the disgraceful actions of bent cops and the state broadcaster. And you're dribbling away about fictional pornography.
No, I am not enjoying anything about this affair, or for that matter this government. It just seems as if we are being goverened by a lot of seedy old men. It is all rather depressing.
Your earlier comments are there for all to see, and to me they suggest otherwise. You know nothing about the facts of this affair except that two bent cops and the BBC have behaved disgracefully, and that the DPM has always denied it. But you've still used it to attack the government.
Could you quote where I used it to attack the government, because I do not think that I have.
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
And the "allegations" should have absolutely nothing to do with porn on computers. But you believe it should, no?
When investigating the harassment investigations, it would seeme sensible for the Cabinet Office to look at corroborating evidence.
That's what makes you a pervert. This 'evidence' is illegally obtained and should be treated as a fabrication.
Think what you like.
I think that the defences of viewing porn at work that we have seen on here and your extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety are rather more depressing.
My "extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety"?!?! You colossal pervert. I'm talking about the disgraceful actions of bent cops and the state broadcaster. And you're dribbling away about fictional pornography.
Are you a lawyer ?
No. Fairly low skilled general IT bod, cryptic crossword compiler, and maths tutor.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
Possible. I mean, how plausible is it that he could have a stash of dirt to dish on such upstanding members of society as Liberals/Liberal Democrats? Given there are so few of them, they do seem to attract a surprising numbers of sleaze balls, perverts, pederasts and convicts....
Not as many as the Tories, of course. But they are better at covering things up.
"A judge granted Quick a search warrant for Green’s homes and constituency office and he pressed the House of Commons serjeant at arms for permission to search Green’s parliamentary office as well. The serjeant gave the police her consent and told the speaker, Michael Martin. A subsequent Commons privileges inquiry concluded that Martin assumed the police must have had a warrant but none had been presented. Quick claims he consulted the deputy Met commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson before the Commons raid."
"A judge granted Quick a search warrant for Green’s homes and constituency office and he pressed the House of Commons serjeant at arms for permission to search Green’s parliamentary office as well. The serjeant gave the police her consent and told the speaker, Michael Martin. A subsequent Commons privileges inquiry concluded that Martin assumed the police must have had a warrant but none had been presented. Quick claims he consulted the deputy Met commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson before the Commons raid."
Yes, shocking abuse of Parliamentary Privilege from Jill Pay and Michael Martin to allow the police within a mile of Damian Green’s office in Parliament. Poor judgement from whoever authorised the other warrants too.
1. Capital for investment in infrastructure can be borrowed at low rates, return much more than the cost of capital and put as an asset on the other side of the balance sheet (like the Government did with student debt).
2. Ask Southern Rail about strikes in the private sector (and customer satisfaction).
3. When Thatcher first mooted privatisation of the utilities, the top management were up in arms against it until it was pointed out to them that their remuneration should match the private sector. Suddenly their opposition vanished and over a couple of years, their remuneration quadrupled.
When one considers the greatest destruction of rail services was carried out when the network was in public hands and came about primarily as a result of a botched 'modernisation' programme and that the whole thing was driven by a minister who had made his fortune building roads, I would suggest your faith in public ownership is seriously misplaced.
I think it is more that he is seen as effective organiser of campaigns, and also that Cable has poor judgement in these matters.
Possible. I mean, how plausible is it that he could have a stash of dirt to dish on such upstanding members of society as Liberals/Liberal Democrats? Given there are so few of them, they do seem to attract a surprising numbers of sleaze balls, perverts, pederasts and convicts....
Not as many as the Tories, of course. But they are better at covering things up.
Well, of course, the LibDems in the 70s & 80s had a Parliamentary party of about 10, including two acknowledged paedophiles (Cyril Smith & Clement Freud), a convicted fraudster (Bessell) and a bunny-lover and dog killer (Thorpe).
I am not a huge fan of the Labour or Tory parties either, but the percentage of wrong'uns in the LibDems does seem anomalously large.
1. Capital for investment in infrastructure can be borrowed at low rates, return much more than the cost of capital and put as an asset on the other side of the balance sheet (like the Government did with student debt).
2. Ask Southern Rail about strikes in the private sector (and customer satisfaction).
3. When Thatcher first mooted privatisation of the utilities, the top management were up in arms against it until it was pointed out to them that their remuneration should match the private sector. Suddenly their opposition vanished and over a couple of years, their remuneration quadrupled.
When one considers the greatest destruction of rail services was carried out when the network was in public hands and came about primarily as a result of a botched 'modernisation' programme and that the whole thing was driven by a minister who had made his fortune building roads, I would suggest your faith in public ownership is seriously misplaced.
It was carried out by Richard Beeching as Chairman of the British Rail Board.
Beeching had been a Director of ICI and subsequently deputy Chairman. He was on a five year secondment from ICI when he axed the railways using private sector logic (an early John Harvey Jones). He was opposed by the Labour opposition and the unions but backed by a Tory Government (Marples).
You really can't blame public sector ownership for the axing of the railways. It was private sector thinking under a Tory Government.
Time to nationalise the energy companies. Put an end to this bullsh*t.
That's what 77% of the public wants.
Come on tories. Do it.
Take back control.
.
Isolution.
At least with different electricity companies available you can switch if you are unhappy with one provider which would not be the case if there was only one state owned provider again as there used to be under the old Central Electricity Generating Board until Thatcher privatised it.
On the other hand, as I know from having been researching my options for when my tariff expires in January, the current pricing is ridiculously complicated. My current supplier, Co-op energy, supplies just two products, gas and electricity. Yet according to comparison websites they seem to have about fifty tariffs to choose from. How can this make any sense?
Use comparethemarket.com or Money Supermarket to compare the best deal based on your needs, if the electricity companies are nationalised again under a Corbyn government you will not get that choice, you will have to take the deal the state owned company gives you.
It was moneysupermarket to which I refer. To be honest, having to choose between fifty tariffs from one supplier (or more accurately
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Well you got no choice with BR of course either.
In most other western European countries you can buy a rail ticket at a straightforward price, lower than ours, for a journey that most of the time will be comfortable and reliable. Why should British passengers have to spend an hour on the internet researching myriad permutations just to obtain a ticket that even then probably costs twice as much per mile as those European journeys?
In most other European nations while they have a main state owned railway operator they also have private operators too, e.g. DB in Germany and Renfre in Spain also compete with some smaller private operators. In Australia and Canada the main rail operator has been privatized and in the US Amtrak is a private company with significant government subsidy.
Comments
The first effect of nationalisation would be that all the cheap deals would disappear.
Similarly, when making a rail journey, exploring whether splitting the journey into two or three separate segments is cheaper than booking the whole trip or - as in the case of a journey I make regularly - whether booking a longer trip starting from a station further back along the line is cheaper than the shorter trip starting from where I will actually board the train - is just annoying and pointless hassle.
The nonsense of the current setup is such that I would nationalise them both in a heartbeat.
Moneysavingexpert also have an excellent service in this area.
He was Shadow Home Office Minister at the time so he'd have an extra plausible reason to do research on Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
Pray that nothing major happens in the word of politics today as I'll be at the Manchester Arena watching Steps featuring The Vengaboys.
Regular switching is not difficult, and people who choose not to do so are perfectly free to make that choice. It is still no reason to wreck it by nationalisation.
Excellent thing, free markets.
Though if he had been doing any research work into extreme porn at the time it wouldn't be surprising if his computer got contaminated with some without his knowledge and without having visited any sites.
He either did or didn't view it and regardless of the legal position I would just really really like to know what happened.
Though the second thing that would happen, after the disappearence of the cheap deals, would be demands for pay rises from everyone employed in the nationalised industries.
The third thing would be strikes.
The Labour manifesto policy on energy nationalisation is "to ensure that national and regional grid infrastructure is brought into public ownership over time”. This is different from retailing. It is about power lines and power stations. This is a subsidised monopoly of strategic importance like roads, railway lines, water reservoirs and pipelines, armies and navies, where true competition is impossible, extremely expensive or very undesirable.
Labour policy on energy retailing is very similar to Tory policy - cap prices and simplify tariffs.
It’ll only take a couple of years before everyone is using an encrypted device to access https sites through a VPN, and then the government will find they’ve got nothing on anyone, the legislation the security services demanded doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot.
If ten years later it's discovered that I had been looking at and storing porn on a works computer while at work, and I was still in the same job, fired.
You can argue as to whether that's proportional or not, and I accept that it's still moot whether Green did it and that the 2 ex coppers' actions aint unimpeachable. However it's an unbreakable rule that saying that it's different for our elected members compared to the average punter 'because reasons' is a crap look for pols & their partisans.
The thing is, that it is different for elected representatives. The voters get the chance to give them the boot, every few years, but they don't have employers. If the voters are outraged by an elected representative viewing porn, they can vote him out.
Think about capital investment and competing interests in government. If there X funds and the choices are schools and hospitals or the grid, where do you think it will go?
Indeed, I have expressed the opinion that Green should stay in post and the Cabinet Office get to the bottom of the allegations.
It is bonkers in its needless complexity.
I have travelled that route for years and haven't spotted that wrinkle.
If someone has the choice of handing their identity to a porn site (for potential identity theft and/or blackmail) or learning to proxy their requests via another country, which will they choose?
This anti-porn law (which seems more a land grab by the BBFC as much as anything) is up there with the EU Cookies directive in the stupidity stakes.
2. Ask Southern Rail about strikes in the private sector (and customer satisfaction).
3. When Thatcher first mooted privatisation of the utilities, the top management were up in arms against it until it was pointed out to them that their remuneration should match the private sector. Suddenly their opposition vanished and over a couple of years, their remuneration quadrupled.
Yes, fares have become more complex, but the complexity used to be hidden because few knew about the best ways to get cheap fares. Now, with t'Internet and companies actually wanting to get passengers, they're much more obvious.
I also think you're mistaken if you think fares will become simple. They won't, for several reasons. Fares increase and decrease in line with usage: you want to promote use using cheaper fares out of busy times, etc, etc. Then there are the routing restrictions (e.g. the 'not via London') that lead to different classes of tickets, and other factors such as Young Persons Railcard and equivalents.
Basically: pricing on a complex network such as the railways is a naturally complex beast. It's probably too complex atm, but the idea that it was ever simple is laughable. You just didn't get to see the complexities because they were hidden from you.
I think that the defences of viewing porn at work that we have seen on here and your extreme defensiveness about investigating sexual impropriety are rather more depressing.
And, amazingly, leaving Merseyside Waterloo at the same time bound for Ryde - which I searched for by mistake the first time - via London including the tube journey Euston to Waterloo - will cost just £44.30!
Given there are so few of them, they do seem to attract a surprising numbers of sleaze balls, perverts, pederasts and convicts....
That said, it would be best for the country if the Tories could continue their pro and anti "Europe" in-fighting in opposition rather than in government.
It flowed from an authorised search warrant that included checking Damian Green's offices, houses, and property therein such as computers?
Asked by Emma Barnett on BBC Radio 5 live if Lord Rennard could return to the front bench in future, he replied: "No. I've ruled that out, where I'm concerned."
He added: "He clearly is the focus of a great deal of critical comment. I want the party to move on… I don't want every conversation to go back to what happened 10 years ago with him."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41990905
At the risk of stretching the point, Jimmy Savile raised millions for charity too, it didn’t excuse him from being a pervert.
https://medium.com/@jo_swinson/sexual-harassment-a-chance-for-change-1e87a9db1581
I’m on Team Anti Rozzer, always have been, especially Bob Quick.
The Fuzz have treated Damian Green shamefully for a decade.
"The former detective, who spent 25 years with the Met, said after the leaks inquiry ended he was ordered by the force to delete the data on the computer copies he had made."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42151148
"A judge granted Quick a search warrant for Green’s homes and constituency office and he pressed the House of Commons serjeant at arms for permission to search Green’s parliamentary office as well. The serjeant gave the police her consent and told the speaker, Michael Martin. A subsequent Commons privileges inquiry concluded that Martin assumed the police must have had a warrant but none had been presented. Quick claims he consulted the deputy Met commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson before the Commons raid."
'modernisation' programme and that the whole thing was driven by a minister who had made his fortune building roads, I would suggest your faith in public ownership is seriously misplaced.
I am not a huge fan of the Labour or Tory parties either, but the percentage of wrong'uns in the LibDems does seem anomalously large.
Small number statistics, perhaps.
Beeching had been a Director of ICI and subsequently deputy Chairman. He was on a five year secondment from ICI when he axed the railways using private sector logic (an early John Harvey Jones). He was opposed by the Labour opposition and the unions but backed by a Tory Government (Marples).
You really can't blame public sector ownership for the axing of the railways. It was private sector thinking under a Tory Government.