Rachel reeves

Allira

I thought you meant a four poster bed at first! 😁

😱😱

Allsorts couldn’t have meant four poster beds. That would have implied curtains for anyone who offended her.

There's a clear argument that Rachel Reeves should be made to be miserable, and have a good cry

Noone should be made to be miserable and have a good cry in politics. They should be held to account which is very far from the same thing! ,

DrWatson There is no valid argument that anyone should be made to have a good cry at all

Totally agree Allira 👏👏👏

DrWatson There is no valid argument that anyone should be made to have a good cry at all.

I don't remember Reeves saying that about reservoirs, perhaps she did, but below is a speech made by Steve Reed last year. I hope he continues to try to improve water services in this country and perseveres where others have failed miserably. However, he has an enormous task ahead of him.


www.gov.uk/government/speeches/steve-reed-speech-on-the-water-special-measures-bill

Allsorts

Will the four posters who are in competition with each other, quoting everything each other says and arguing, it's so rude and childish.

Will the four posters do what?

I thought you meant a four poster bed at first! 😁
(Sorry, was that childish?)

Reservoirs don’t store sewage Dr Watson, they are for clean water. They do provide the water to enable water/sewage treatment plants to work though, particularly in areas where river levels are low. Therefore there is a direct link, because when water is low, the water companies discharge raw sewage directly into rivers and the sea.

There's a clear argument that Rachel Reeves should be made to be miserable, and have a good cry, given the incompetence she (and her boss!) have shown in a number of topics.

They were elected on a wave of enthusiasm, the country hoping to rebound from umpteen years of Tory complacency, and in the year since we've seen nothing but a further torrent of sheer incompetence (mixed with a dollop of arrogance).

In addition to their recent backflips and U-Turns, oh, and that boastful promise to eradicate illegal immigrants (going SOOOO well?), there is a vastly contentious issue of a proposed new reservoir, out in Oxfordshire, a project that's been around for decades, with a long line of technical objections against it, and a viable alternative for a quicker and much cheaper way to get further water resources.

Reeves, in a speech earlier this year, stated that a new reservoir would be a great idea as it would "help the water companies solve their problems with releasing sewage into rivers and the sea".

That statement is so blindingly stupid that the woman - even by the meagre standards of most national politicians - should have been immediately sacked. It only takes a moment's thought (that she couldn't manage?!) to see that the only way a reservoir helps with sewage is to use it to store the stuff.

NB -- I have no political allegiance, having seen many decades of incompetence, stupidity, and sometimes criminal activity, from all sides of the spectrum.

Mollygo

Thanks Doodledog. It a good point. Now we see tit for tat in Parliament we should see it as a lack of personal integrity.

My mum used ^Would you run in front of a bus just because he did?^

I'm not at all saying how people should see anything, but hasn't tit-for-tat always been seen as childish? Whether in Parliament or anywhere else - it's just no defence at all.

I'm not sure I deserve thanks for making such an obvious point, but will accept them graciously .

Will the four posters who are in competition with each other, quoting everything each other says and arguing, it's so rude and childish.

Quote and picture from the "Open Britain" email

"It’s a cliche to say politics is a tough business, or that women in public office face increased scrutiny and unfair standards compared to their male counterparts - but neither are any less true for that. Rachel Reeves’ obvious distress on Wednesday was an uncomfortable reminder of these facts. It came just hours after government concessions to head off a major backbench rebellion over welfare left her fiscal rules in jeopardy, and offered an insight into her opponents who chose - or not - to use a publicly vulnerable moment as a political attack.

Thanks Doodledog. It a good point. Now we see tit for tat in Parliament we should see it as a lack of personal integrity.

My mum used Would you run in front of a bus just because he did?

But that assumes that people have no personal integrity. Just because there are those who accept bad behaviour, or justify it on a tit-for-tat basis doesn't mean that individuals have to behave badly. People are responsible for their own behaviour.

As my mum used to say, 'if X decided to jump off a cliff, would you do the same?'

Yes, it's a shame there are so many people who think like that including politicians. 😁

Mollygo

Of course it doesn’t need to be accepted. But the fact that it will be used means the users do accept it as a means of self justification.

Yes, it's a shame there are so many people who think like that.

Of course it doesn’t need to be accepted. But the fact that it will be used means the users do accept it as a means of self justification.

Mollygo

Doodledog

I don’t care who might have done what had circumstances differed. That is a lame excuse for bad behaviour (almost worse than ‘s/he did it first, Miss’). KN was spiteful and unprofessional. When people show you who they are, believe them.

I do.
That’s one reason why I dislike several politicians at the moment.

Me too, but I wouldn't excuse bullying of any of them, or make excuses if any of the ones I do like behaved as KB did.

Mollygo

growstuff

Mini2020
Rachel Reeves would have behaved the same. She is a woman who would try to belittle everyone, she shows it in her politics.

growstuff
Even if that were true, tit-for-tat doesn't excuse any behaviour.

No it doesn’t, but it will be used as an excuse. It frequently is.

That doesn't mean it has to be accepted (unless people have turned into sheep).

I have more respect for Rachel Reeves. She could have made an excuse not to be there but sat it out in the face of inexcusable cruelty by that Badenoch woman.

Doodledog

I don’t care who might have done what had circumstances differed. That is a lame excuse for bad behaviour (almost worse than ‘s/he did it first, Miss’). KN was spiteful and unprofessional. When people show you who they are, believe them.

I do.
That’s one reason why I dislike several politicians at the moment.

growstuff

Mini2020
Rachel Reeves would have behaved the same. She is a woman who would try to belittle everyone, she shows it in her politics.

growstuff
Even if that were true, tit-for-tat doesn't excuse any behaviour.

No it doesn’t, but it will be used as an excuse. It frequently is.

Allira

^KB is a total amateur in politics^
Well, she's only been a politician since 2017.
But then, Starmer has only been an MP since 2015

She's been a politician for longer than that. Before being selected as an MP, she was on the London Assembly

I don’t care who might have done what had circumstances differed. That is a lame excuse for bad behaviour (almost worse than ‘s/he did it first, Miss’). KN was spiteful and unprofessional. When people show you who they are, believe them.

KB is a total amateur in politics
Well, she's only been a politician since 2017.
But then, Starmer has only been an MP since 2015

KB is a total amateur in politics. I expected nothing less from her than to make personal remarks about a fellow MP who was clearly suffering. I felt for RR, I've been in a meeting and not been able to control my tears due to something happening in my private life. A colleague reported this to HR and I was asked afterwards to explain myself. I was horrified that they thought it was OK to ask.

Come on folks. Talking politics can be a fun experience! I read it on GN.
Mcbab
whereas the MP sitting behind her reached out to ask if she was ok
Even though sitting behind her, he could not see her face?
But someone next to her didn’t notice?
It gets better and better.

I still don’t condone KB making use of RR’s distress, but no one can truthfully say that LP in opposition wouldn’t have made use of something like that.