pastafarian
Well-known member
fine thanks,eating lovely M & S food too
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Brilliant stuff from David Cameron today
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
fine thanks,eating lovely M & S food too
Tony Meolas Loan Spell
Slut Faced Whores
Because you couldnt accuse any political party of doing the same... oh no.
Southern Scouse
Well-known member
- Jul 21, 2011
- 2,023
I agree, I just think, hopefully, that UKIP will do enough damage to force through a Labour majority.
Bloody phone lol
pastafarian
Well-known member
well spotted
how on earth is this article linked to how Cameron
will increase the rights of corporations after an overhall of The Human Rights Act
aggressive rhetoric tips coming from Nibble.......whatever next....Pot Kettle Black
Nibble
New member
- Jan 3, 2007
- 19,238
You also need to learn to accept defeat with grace and poise. You are making an argument from nothing, I stated nothing as solid fact and pointed out it's what I was lead to believe but was not 100% certain and not 100% accurate. There is nothing to argue about but I get the impression that is your sole aim on here.
pastafarian
Well-known member
ok nibble ill go with that
spring hall convert
Well-known member
[MENTION=28206]Rod Marsh[/MENTION] : I'm deeply hurt at all your negative marking. Are you going to come out and play?
chucky1973
New member
That last part was said in jest.
spring hall convert
Well-known member
Apologies, I have sense of humour failure once I set foot in any politcal thread.
Absolutely correct
Its far from absolutely correct though. Its naive nonsense.
For starters, the tax breaks would only come in IF the defecit is cleared, which doesn't look like happening any time within the next term anyway.
Beyond that, even if it DID happen, where do you think the money will come from to pay for the bribes? "Here's £1000 extra in your take home pay. Enjoy spending it on your family. Oh, by the way, VAT has gone up to 25% and we've stopped your famiy tax credits"
Its all absolute bollocks.
Seagull58
In the Algarve
I gave several examples. The issue here is that Fearon was not seeking justice, he was seeking compensation for being shot whilst burgling someone's house because the injuries sustained supposedly meant he was not able to go and burgle anyone else's house. He received 5000 in legal aid to pursue a quite preposterous claim that should not even have been considered.
Seagull58
In the Algarve
I'm cutting and pasting examples because they're examples. Isn't that the way to quote examples. Would you prefer that I made them up?
Seagull58
In the Algarve
No, he was pursuing his calim under the Human Rights Act. He received legal aid to pursue the claim. Kids who break the law should be punished.
Nibble
New member
- Jan 3, 2007
- 19,238
jgmcdee
New member
- Mar 25, 2012
- 931
which in a civil case *is* justice. You can't sue someone to prison. And the ability for people to sue them won't change without a far more fundamental rewriting of law than the Tories are proposing.
No this isn't what he was suing for. He was suing for compensation against loss of sex life and inability to carry out his hobby of martial arts.
And that's the problem. It's not for you to say what should and shouldn't be considered. You are entitled to make your own value judgements, but if you expect them to be the basis of an entire country's laws then I'm afraid you're in for a disappointment. Instead, any case which is not explicitly excluded must be put through the system and at the end of it reviews can be undertaken and changes made if necessary. Yes it gives rise to cases like this (which by the way never even reached court) but I'd far rather have a system which starts lenient and can be reviewed than a system which is so stringent that the deserving cases which never pass through the gates are quietly forgotten forever more.
ThePompousPaladin
New member
- Apr 7, 2013
- 1,025
i've also voted for all 3 main parties in them past, we must be in the minority.
However i think Osborne and Cameron have proved that that they can't run an economy - we doubled dipped into recession - none of the other major economies did as far as i'm aware. Which is one of the reasons we're the 'fastest growing' now, we dropped needlessly low under their guidance...
As for how Milliband and Balls would do, i don't know - Milliband certainly doesn't have charisma - not sure how much of that is needed to do economics though?
I'm not sure which way to vote, both seem poor choices to be honest.
Seagull58
In the Algarve
No, he sued for loss of earnings. He was not a gigolo nor a professional martial arts exponent. A claim for injuries sustained whilst committing a criminal act should have been refused without spending any legal aid.