Considering voting Tory?

The question was not directed at you jura. Only ww knows if her apology was sincere and only JRM knows if his was. You don’t in either case, you only have your opinion.

How about this

The Secret Barrister

Like a nightmare nursery rhyme, we’ll soon have Dorries apologising for Bone apologising for Baker apologising for Patel apologising for Cleverly apologising for Bridgen apologising for Mogg, until Grayling comes out and reminds us that there is no disaster he cannot make worse.

From Russia with Love

www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/britain-eu-johnson-russian/

This

Nick Keho

Polticians have always spun the odd porky but the Tories are now lying on an industrial scale. Democracy can't function in a fake news world. Tories need to go for that reason alone.
Vote Lab, Libs, Indie, Green, SNP, Plaid...Lord Buckethead...anything but Tory. #ToriesLie

Johnson has the brass neck to accuse Corbyn of being in cahoots with Russia, when it is him who is having his strings pulled by the sinister Dominic Cummings, who is the Russian puppet, just like Trump.

Vote Johnson, get Putin

Dominic Cummings is a Russian puppet? I think there are more than a few crossed strings on this thread.

What. Never heard of the Burgess, Maclean, and Philby? The only thing is they sold their country for principles (even it the country didn't agree with those principles) the Oxford lot seem to sell us down the river on a get even richer motive.

blimey lemon, where on earth have you been !?!

Dominic Cummings is a Russian puppet? I think there are more than a few crossed strings on this thread.

why do you think they are not publishing?

* Vote Johnson, get Putin* and of course The Trump!

Some Tory supporters

pbs.twimg.com/media/EIpYZO-XsAE0Ywb.jpg

OK

At last the Tories have put out some concrete information, that look at and begin to evaluate.

Javid spending proposals.

Borrowing for infrastructure should not exceed 3% of GDP.
This compares with 1.8% over recent years.

The OECD recommends that advanced nations spend 3.5% of GDP on infrastructure.

This will be paid for by extra borrowing.

The chief economist of IPPR the Conservative borrowing is about current spending and tax cuts.

Javid has not yet laid out exactly how the extra money will be spent.

Hang on what happened to living within our means, not borrowing and managing a household budget??? Isn't that what they have been saying for the last 10 years?

Well, we do know that all that austerity was unnecessary trisher.

I've no problem with the tories spending some money so long as it isn't accompanied by tax cuts for the rich and big business and it incorporates some green initiatives to deal with climate change...

They certainly blinded the Daily Mail reader/Conservative voter though Maizie. He/she believed we actually needed austerity and for 10 years!

Oh, silly us, thinking the financial crash really happened eh?

T May said austerity was coming to an end back in March, so I see no contradiction with Johnson splashing some cash if they are returned with a majority in the GE.

Thankfully though, they would not splash it with the same wild abandon that McDonnell is promising to!

oh lemon- you are becoming really funny.

Have you seen Johnson's reckless record for spending ridiculous money for no return at all

Bless Eddie Mair. It's wonderful to see more and more journalists not taking stupid deflections and attacks instead of answering the questions asked. Even Piers Morgan, who really took Cleverley to task over the appalling doctoring of the Starmer interview.

www.facebook.com/LBC/videos/583452952398800/

I do my humble best jura to make you chuckle.?It’s all I can think about most days.

Economists are predicting trouble ahead ( the country going bankrupt ) if the LP go ahead with their spending plans, .....
Although, if they got into power no doubt would say that the plans were ‘just manifesto aspirations.Well, I would hope so anyway.

I would be the first to see that the labour party expenditure plans (should they be elected) appear to be very large, but the vast majority of that expenditure will be for large scale infrastructure projects that Britain badly requires.

Productivity per worker in this country has been at best stagnant over a considerable period, and at times even seen to be falling. That many feel is due to the shortcomings of the underlying infrastructure in Britain which has not kept pace with the ever-increasing demands made upon it.

Britains railway system especially in the north of England is antiquated and outdated and requires a huge investment. The United Kingdoms motorways and trunk roads again require enormous investment if it is to meet the requirements of the ever-growing demands made on it.

Already major motorways such as the M6, M5 and M1 almost everyday turn into Europes largest car parks at times, and the East Coast and West Coast main rail lines suffer both overcrowding in scheduling and passenger numbers on those services.

The North of England again suffers the worst in overall transport infrastructure with both road and rail networks across the Pennines totally unfit for the traffic requirements made upon them.The foregoing affects the productivity of all who use them especially mobile workers many of whom have the lowest productivity output per worker in Europe.

So, Britain's transport infrastructure requires vast investment if this nation is to raise its productivity levels and remain a competitive economy in the commercial world. However, a highly efficient economy means higher wages and salaries for workers and their employers, and that brings forward a higher tax income for the government which then pays for the higher borrowing required for the upgrading of the nations underlying infrastructure.

Therefore I for one applaud the Labour Party expenditure plans as I feel that should they be implemented it will mean a great leap forward in enabling greater productivity that will benefit all who reside in this country.

The United Kingdoms motorways and trunk roads again require enormous investment if it is to meet the requirements of the ever-growing demands made on it.

Surely, in view of the need to stop using fossil fuels, we should be looking at ways to cut the traffic on our roads, not encourage it by 'improving' the road network? Freight should be moved by rail wherever possible. Hybrid and electric vehicles used for local distribution from rail depots. I can recall this being mooted in the 70s but roads were king..

Economists are predicting trouble ahead ( the country going bankrupt ) if the LP go ahead with their spending plans, .....

Which economists would that be, lemon? Have you any links? I understand the the FT is rather positive about LP plans.

Are you aware that the tory party has announced spending plans of much the same magnitude as Labour's? How do you think they're going to manage it?

Of course, most economists know that a country with its own sovereign currency cannot 'go bankrupt'. They also know that increasing the money supply, or borrowing, will not make the UK end up like Venezuela or Zimbabwe, or any other place you'd like to name. Some countries have been doing it for years with no detriment. Japan, out of industrialised nations, runs the most enormous deficit yet remains productive and prosperous...

Perhaps you should study a bit of economics...

Incidentally, the IMF have said that austerity wasn't necessary...

MaizieD, in regard to your post @22:41 yesterday (09/11/19) whether Britains freight traffic travels by road, rail water or air it will still require enormous investment in infrastructure if it is to be kept on the move. However, it is very likely that the road network will remain the primary source for transport into the foreseeable future although the vehicles on that network will be electrically powered at some point

Britain's over half a million heavy goods vehicles will continue to be required to use the road network as at present rail does not have and cannot ever have the capacity and flexibility to have such amounts of freight transferred onto that system.

Therefore I feel that the Labour Party large-scale spending plans are necessary, and in that it can also bring about a less London centric Britain with a more equal spread of wealth, especially in Northern Britain.

The problem as I see it, Grandad is that facilitating more road traffic just generates more fossil fuel use with its adverse implications for climate change and pollution. We are at a point where radical thinking is required in order to face the challenge of preserving our planet for future generations. More of the same will not do.

It is undeniable that rail freight is more environmentally sound than road freight. We should be investing in developing rail facilities to accommodate much more long distance bulk freight carriage and looking at more environmentally sound methods of distribution of goods from rail freight terminals. Also at restoring valuable rail transport links which fell under the Beeching axe. And, I'm beginning to warm to the idea of HS2 as freeing some of the existing rail network for freight.

I absolutely agree with you that Labour's large-scale spending plans. I just think that they must be targeted with Green objectives in mind, not just perpetrating the status quo.

TRansport 2000 was the group I was thinking of which was campaigning against road freight traffic in the 1970s. It's now become the Campaign for better Transport. Interesting site.

bettertransport.org.uk/

I believe thoughtful green-based, large scale investment in the North could completely turn round the Tory neglect of the infrastructure and bring our productivity up to and past that of other countries.

What must be done, in order to achieve this however, is make the decision making Northern based, with greening the project written in.

Tories, in their usual way will put in too little capital, centralised decision making on London and use pseudo economics to go for short-term cheap, long term damaging and expensive answers.

How can we be sure this will be done properly? Voting Green would sadly be a wasted vote when it comes to getting the investment; voting Conservative might well suggest you have the sort of mental-health issues that send you back for the same painful punishment as before. Can Labour's Green credentials be trusted.