Trevor Phillips - Tory mouthpiece or just thick?

Trevor Phillips - Tory mouthpiece or just thick?

Neither!

You saw it then petal53?

petal53

^Trevor Phillips - Tory mouthpiece or just thick?^

Neither!

Hear, hear!

And yes, I did see it. I also saw an interview where Angela was asked multiple times which companies thought Labour was doing well. She didn't name one of them. The interviewer listed many businesses who didn't agree

We need some more information on the O/P as I'm not sure exactly what we are talking about PoliticsNerd.

Is there a link please?

I've found a short link to the discussion on housing NotSpagetti
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGLknpw11Us
More might become available.

I havent seen this particular interview, but I always find TP interesting, and challenging, he doesn't 'follow the crowd'.

I saw it. I like AR but she wasn't giving full answers and he doesn't settle for that however he's interviewing.

That should have been whoever not however. Bit like the Morecambe and Wise sketch I got all the right letters just not in the right order.

Political Nerd, I think you muddled your title.
It is Angela Rayner who is thick, not Trevor Phillips.
Cunning yes; intelligent, no.

Uneducated and ignorant, which she thinks identifies her with what she persists in labelling 'the working-class;' totally unqualified and no attempt to remedy it; promoted way beyond her abilities on the strength of her union associations, and totally reliant on her support staff to provide the script for her speeches and interviews, as seen today.

They covered so many topics but on housing I thought it a fairly standard political interview with a challenging interviewer and robust, clear, answers.

No politician will answer every question fully when there are so many "whatiffereies"

I dont haven't seen enough of Phillipson to know if he has a particular POV, and I don't agree with the caricature you outline, easybee, she is an intelligent woman.

theworriedwell

I saw it. I like AR but she wasn't giving full answers and he doesn't settle for that however he's interviewing.

She gave the answer several times. I'm no Labour Party supporter, but I do find this interesting and the process, as described by AR was clearly understandable. He was simply bullying although she seems very able to stand her ground.

They say you get a lot more with honey than you do with vinegar but that seems to pass him by. He wanted her to say something she didn't want to say and she is perfectly entitled not to bend to bullying.

The Conservatives didn't have a plan for house building but it seems their supporters are very happy to use aggression to defend their time in office against a party that does have a plan. The problem seems to be that the Tories are afraid Labour WILL meet their housebuilding targets.

What information do others think he was trying to extract from her? My view was that he wasn't interested in the steps so far and what happens next, he just wanted to trip her up. That is not good journalism it simply atempting to generate click bait.

Yes, he was trying to trip her up quite aggressively and she stood firm and outlined the policies clearly.
But I dont think it that unusual in a press interview?

I think it's reasonable to be confident and decisive in an interview but seriously, when is it ever reasonable to aggressive? And what did we learn that was addition to what we had already been told?

Trying to give developers an incentive to build on brownfield sites seems to me eminently sensible. They would rather build huge houses with pocket gardens on greenfields outside commuter villages where there's no local employment, I guess that's what their market research tells them is profitable.
TP was pushing to get AR to say she would sanction councils who refused to co-operate, fair enough if we were in a situation where that was happening in any area, but we're not & may never be.Wasting interview time IMO.

Well said.
Yes, thats exactly what Phillips was trying to make her say to achieve a "coup"

as in

"Labour will xxxxxxxx" just wait for the right wing shock horror headlines du jour.

Instead they were obliged to stick to (D Express) "Angela Raynor declares war on NIMBYS"

Have just watched the Black Belt Barrister pick over this interview. Takes an independant voice to disseminate. Agree with Easybee.

Independant? I've just watched it. He pretends to be all middle ground "on the one hadn't and one the other type phrases but is very, very far from.

Angela did well, as always.

Angela Rayner is thick, uneducated, has staff to right her speeches ? really eazybee

Just watched Angela Rayner being interviewed on GB News and she avoided answering a question numerous times.

She put out a statement about companies who approved of her plan regarding house building. She was simply asked to name a a couple of businesses who support her. She said “there are many companies”, asked the same question and gave the same answer, then again, then again. It was hilarious. She giggled and smirked and looked ridiculous. If she had just named one business that would have satisfied the female interviewer.

PoliticsNerd

I think it's reasonable to be confident and decisive in an interview but seriously, when is it ever reasonable to aggressive? And what did we learn that was addition to what we had already been told?

I watched it and thought he gave her an easier ride than most politicians he interviews.
He asked the right questions and she answered reasonably well.
Trevor Phillips is an intelligent man and a good interviewer.

I thought he was pretty aggressive.
Angela wasn't.

Oreo it’s quite obvious from the OP who is supported and who is decried. It will be equally obvious all the way through the thread, who supports anything said or done by the LP ands who doesn’t.
Each side will know they are right
It’s long been said of politicians of any party that they avoid giving answers, wherever possible, so I’m not sure why those who have in the past, said, agreed with, or implied that, are suddenly backtracking.