Things that are slipping quietly in whilst the press focus on the Russian poisoning

That's the problem, isn't it? It all depends where you get your FACTS from and which sources you feel you can trust. In a situation like this the Government have easily justified reasons for withholding some of the facts, leaving the whole story open to speculation, false flags, conspiracy theories, etc.

The sad thing is that the public, having been blatantly lied to by governments of all political persuasions, can no longer trust them to tell the truth. When opposition politicians or neutral journalists state their perception of the reality of the situation, they are denounced as 'Enemies of the State' and in this case as 'Russian Apologists'.

Someone said that no one on the Gransnet forums could possibly KNOW the facts. This is true to the extent that no-one can know everything. However, there must be many of us who personally or through trusted family and other contacts know more than most, if not about the current issue, certainly about other dodgy dossiers/fake news/cover ups in the past. If such people are wise they keep this information to themselves as, otherwise, they are at best, subjected to derision or worse case scenario, find their very selves labelled/listed as Enemies of the State.

Consider for a minute that every active and vocal Scottish/Welsh/Irish Nationalist is considered an Enemy of the State, as they are campaigning (democratically) for the break up of the UK. Active members of CND, anti fracking and other similar groups who engage in peaceful protests/marches etc. can also find they are under surveillance by 'our' secret services. That's a lot of perfectly normal people, going about their business in a perfectly legitimate way.

Who indeed, lemon...

This is not a case of the government taking free school meals from a million children who are currently receiving them

But aren't all primary children in receipt of FSM at the moment? Or has that been stopped now. I know that at the time it was introduced it made it difficult for secondary schools who were getting Pupil Premium (in lieu of a previous award) because eligibility for PP was based on children having been in receipt of 'claimed for' FSM. When universal FSM were introduced parents didn't bother claiming... so pupils who should have attracted PP didn't get it.

Yes, it gave me a laugh MaizieD the trouble is, who is to know you weren’t in deadly earnest.

I thought you'd like it, lemon

Elegran Wot me, miss?

So, no point to your OP then trisher....
That’s the problem with only giving half a story!

‘Perhaps they didn’t actually do it themselves’ etc MaizieD
Hilarious.
paddyann a ridiculous post from you too.

Well, it's happened at a very useful time for the government... Brexit's not going very well,

Perhaps they didn't actually do it themselves, perhaps they out out a contract...one of their nice Russian oligarch friends has been helpful...

So the uk government poisoned two Russians to cover up their alleged savage meal cuts , bet they brought about the snow falls too.

Are you trying to spoil a good rant with facts, Jane?

www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-labour-arent-telling-the-full-story-about-free-school-meals

Quote: FactCheck verdict:
"There's some respectable maths behind Labour’s claim that a million children will lose out on free school meals after the government introduces a means test.
But they haven’t mentioned two key points:
No one who is currently eligible for free school meals under Universal Credit will lose their entitlement.
In fact, under Universal Credit, 50,000 more children will receive school meals by 2022 than would have done under the previous benefits system.
This is not a case of the government taking free school meals from a million children who are currently receiving them: it’s about comparing two future, hypothetical scenarios. Both of them are more generous than the old benefits system."

Another point to note is that the families referred to as living on £7400 pa also receive universal credit. The £7400 refers to the money they earn from employment. It's not the total family income.

I'm saying I'll keep an open mind about the perpetrator UNTIL there is concrete proof...I have no doubt they've done their share of bumping off folk so I wont rule anyone out yet

paddyann

"call me an old cynic but wasn't that the purpose of the "Russian" incident? Of course the fine upstanding "British" government wouldn't get involved in killing spies...would they.....oh wait they didn't actually kill them.."

Are you saying you believe the attempted murder of Sergei and Yulia Skripal was carried out by the British Government?

'A good day to bury bad news'

It was Labours Stephen Byers Special Adviser/spin doctor Jo Moore who has the honour of this phrase being attributed to in recent times.

Jo Moore sent the e-mail as New York's twin towers burned, suggesting that 11 September was a good day to "bury" bad news.

By suggesting the attack on the World Trade Centre was a good time to bury any bad news / publicity both she and Stephen Byers ulimately paid the price .

call me an old cynic but wasn't that the purpose of the "Russian" incident? Of course the fine upstanding "British" government wouldn't get involved in killing spies...would they.....oh wait they didn't actually kill them...so are the Russians so incompetent they would only partially do the "job" and then leave their calling card at the site ?

What somebody once called “a good day to bury bad news”
I believe that person was sacked.
This stinks.

And, to revert to trisher's post. How on earth do people with children manage on £7,400 per year?

Perhaps one of our tory supporters could supply the calculations that show that they live in the very lap of luxury on such an income...

The other 'news' which seems strangely muted was the EU statement that we can't start trade and transition negotiations until the Irish border is sorted out. Properly! No fudging.

It will be interesting to see what comes from the EU summit meeting this week.

I understood that this 'England Only' change was taken under EVEL rules and don't see how the DUP could have voted on it. I believe that some of the Scottish Tories tried to vote in favour and were told they could not.