Is there any alternative to the jaundiced Tory attitudes?

First topic message reminder :

Depressing, isn't it? All the miserable gits can come up with is oppression of the poor and fear of the disadvantaged. Never mind, here's something that can make us all feel better about the human race - even if it does have to include Cameron and Company .........

http://www.buzzfeed.com/expresident/pictures-that-will-restore-your-faith-in-humanity

Ivanhoe wrote:

Redflag wrote:

Ivanhoe wrote:

blueturando wrote:

I thought we were talking about alternatives?.

You'll be lucky Boatlady.....I can see the tumble weed blowing through the forum as we speak.
Endless criticism and tribalism is easy....coming up with alternatives seems to be a step to far for most posters

Ill tell you what, bluey.

Yes its easy to be critical of the Tory right wing and what this elitist dogmatic crap has done for the most vulnerable in our society since Thatcher.

So let's bring it down to grass roots.

The vulnerable need more money in their pockets, from the elderly, to the disabled. And that's just for starters.

Now if you were PM, what would you do about sorting that out ?

I would like to know that myself Ivanhoe, his party is quite good at asking the Labour party for what they would do instead of taking it off the elderly and vulnerable.

The right wing always attack the old and the vulnerable, because they know that Britain largely is a politically apathetic nation.

I do not think that will last past April 2013 Ivanhoe, then the entire UK will wake up and smell the coffee.

[quote="Redflag"]

Ivanhoe wrote:

Redflag wrote:

Ivanhoe wrote:

blueturando wrote:

I thought we were talking about alternatives?.

You'll be lucky Boatlady.....I can see the tumble weed blowing through the forum as we speak.
Endless criticism and tribalism is easy....coming up with alternatives seems to be a step to far for most posters

Ill tell you what, bluey.

Yes its easy to be critical of the Tory right wing and what this elitist dogmatic crap has done for the most vulnerable in our society since Thatcher.

So let's bring it down to grass roots.

The vulnerable need more money in their pockets, from the elderly, to the disabled. And that's just for starters.

Now if you were PM, what would you do about sorting that out ?

I would like to know that myself Ivanhoe, his party is quite good at asking the Labour party for what they would do instead of taking it off the elderly and vulnerable.

The right wing always attack the old and the vulnerable, because they know that Britain largely is a politically apathetic nation.

I do not think that will last past April 2013 Ivanhoe, then the entire UK will wake up and smell the coffee.[/quote

Not a chance. Apathy is this country's middle name.

So - err, what would you all do if in government?
How would you arrange society in a way that is fairer for everyone.
Personally, I'm a bit of a big government person - I know there is a risk of various abuses, but haven't the last several years shown us that there will be abuses in any form of society?
Question is, would you rather be abused by an unregulated banking sector, and by the outsourcing of essential services, which as far as I can see always means less service for more money, or by the 0.1 percent of fraudulent benefit claimants, and a few lazy public servants?
I know this is simplistic, and I'm waiting in fear and trembling for you all to descend on me with a barrage of (hopefully) relevant and illuminating refutals of my position.

boatlady wrote:So - err, what would you all do if in government?
How would you arrange society in a way that is fairer for everyone.
Personally, I'm a bit of a big government person - I know there is a risk of various abuses, but haven't the last several years shown us that there will be abuses in any form of society?
Question is, would you rather be abused by an unregulated banking sector, and by the outsourcing of essential services, which as far as I can see always means less service for more money, or by the 0.1 percent of fraudulent benefit claimants, and a few lazy public servants?
I know this is simplistic, and I'm waiting in fear and trembling for you all to descend on me with a barrage of (hopefully) relevant and illuminating refutals of my position.

I believe in the role of the State. Does this answer your question ?

boatlady wrote:So - err, what would you all do if in government?
How would you arrange society in a way that is fairer for everyone.

The first thing to recognise is that many of the people who get themselves elected to govern do so precisely in order to maintain the unfair principles on which Capitalist Democracy is founded.

Many famous men became famous for having ONE good idea ONCE. Blair is included, because he recognised that Labour was unelectable to Government so long as it threatened to nationalise every business in sight.

Once in government he became a control freak and passed more new Law than any other administration before or since. He refused to delegate authority, and riding the back of a landslide majority made most decisions at Number Ten, without troubling the House of Commons.

The one word "Iraq" will forever be attached to his name, unfortunately, and goes a long way to explaining the apalling situation in which we find ourselves now.

bobby wrote:Hello boatlady. What I believe we need is a return of the younger Tony Blair.

He with the much berated Gordon Brown gave us over 10 years of unprecedented growth, coupled to stability that I can not remember at any other time. Blair’s Britain was for everyone, the wealthy, the businessman/woman (the main wealth earner), the workers and the poor. I know we keep hearing how the rich got richer and the differential between the two grew, but in my opinion that is not what matters, what matters is, how many people where taken out of poverty and how the workers where given a better deal, Labour introduced the minimum wage, winter fuel allowance (since reduced by the filthy Tory Bastards), the Social Chapter which gave employee’s rights of employment (something the Tory shits are now in the process of dismantling).

Labour under Blair allowed business to flourish in the certain knowledge that if you choke off business its those lower down who suffer the most, look what’s happening now, exactly that.

Blair’s Government was the first Government that Governed for the country as a whole and not for any particular group, in the years he was in the guvnors chair, he did make some errors, but he made far fewer in 10 years that the herd of crap headed by Herr David Cameron, has in the past two and a half years.

Now I’m waiting for Ivanhoe (who’s name is as old as his politics) to preach that Labour under Tony Blair where not Labour but Thatcherite, or some such bollocks.

booby, if you dont know yourself that Tony Blair took Labour to the right for 13 years, then there's no hope for you.

Ivanhoe said: booby, if you dont know yourself that Tony Blair took Labour to the right for 13 years, then there's no hope for you.

Firstly Ivanhoe, I suffered the loss of two businesses because of Conservative recessions, and also had to sell my home both times, it was because of the continued growth and stability Labour gave us that I am now quite a wealthy man and can employ others. Had you have had your way, and Labour where led by someone in the mould of Michael Foot, we would have had 30 years of real right wing Tory Government.
Ivanhoe, I am not as obsessed by right and left as you are. I am more interested in right and wrong.
You have been prattling on for ages about New Labour being Thatcherite, for no other reason than they helped business to flourish. Tell me my old fashioned Knight, how else do you think all of the benefits of Blair’s Labour funded things like the Winter Fuel Allowance and the minimum wage, do you really think Blair had the Goose that laid the Golden Egg, no of course not his exchequer got funds mainly from the Tax Take, which of course you can only take whilst people are working and people can only work whilst there are Companies to employ them. You really need to get on grip on what the real world is all about, I don’t care if you call parties conservative with a big C or a small c, or if you call Labour just Labour or New Labour, all I will say is for you to keep saying Blair was Thatcherite is a total load of bollocks, they are and have been Labour, but unlike you they needed and did change with the times and did.

What do you think the UK would be like now, if Blair hadn’t won his landslide victory in 1997, I personally shudder to think, but then I guess there are more than one dinosaur around, its just that you are the only one on these boards.

bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: booby, if you dont know yourself that Tony Blair took Labour to the right for 13 years, then there's no hope for you.

Firstly Ivanhoe, I suffered the loss of two businesses because of Conservative recessions, and also had to sell my home both times, it was because of the continued growth and stability Labour gave us that I am now quite a wealthy man and can employ others. Had you have had your way, and Labour where led by someone in the mould of Michael Foot, we would have had 30 years of real right wing Tory Government.
Ivanhoe, I am not as obsessed by right and left as you are. I am more interested in right and wrong.
You have been prattling on for ages about New Labour being Thatcherite, for no other reason than they helped business to flourish. Tell me my old fashioned Knight, how else do you think all of the benefits of Blair’s Labour funded things like the Winter Fuel Allowance and the minimum wage, do you really think Blair had the Goose that laid the Golden Egg, no of course not his exchequer got funds mainly from the Tax Take, which of course you can only take whilst people are working and people can only work whilst there are Companies to employ them. You really need to get on grip on what the real world is all about, I don’t care if you call parties conservative with a big C or a small c, or if you call Labour just Labour or New Labour, all I will say is for you to keep saying Blair was Thatcherite is a total load of bollocks, they are and have been Labour, but unlike you they needed and did change with the times and did.

What do you think the UK would be like now, if Blair hadn’t won his landslide victory in 1997, I personally shudder to think, but then I guess there are more than one dinosaur around, its just that you are the only one on these boards.

I agree with you up to a certain point bobby, Tony Blair had to do what he had to do to get the normal tory voter to vote Labour that is how we got a landslide in 1997 but he never forgot about the every day Labour member/voter but maybe he took us a bit too far to the right and that is what a lot of people did not like about him, but I would never say that Tony was a Thatcherite.

Redflag wrote:

tlttf wrote:Yes they were wrong Red, however they did declare what they were claiming for and didn't write false receipts. As for Paedo's your walking a dodgy line there my friend and should be aware of allegations without proof. I'm sure Ivan will have a word.

It has been announced on the TV news a person that was abused gave an interview to reporter and the Tory MP concerned was the MP for Chester plus advised the Maggot during her reign of terror plus the two inquiries that they set up where shredded and let 23 nasty pieces of work away with it. So why do you not mention the wrong doings of the Tory and L/Ds when it comes to the scandal of EXPENSES your just as bad as your party tittf they still will not take RESPONSIBILITY for the TWO & HALF years they have been in power or all the fcuked up policies they have brought in.

Do you believe all you hear Red?



Sponsored by Rapid Solicitors
Victim says sorry for claim top Tory was his abuser


Published on Saturday 10 November 2012 06:00

A child abuse victim last night apologised to former Tory Party treasurer Lord McAlpine after confirming that he was not the man responsible for abusing him as a teenager.

SIn a statement quoted by the BBC, Mr Messham said: “After seeing a picture in the past hour of the individual concerned, this (is) not the person I identified by photograph presented to me by the police in the early 1990s, who told me the man in the photograph was Lord McAlpine

Whoops!

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/victim-says-sorry-for-claim-top-tory-was-his-abuser-1-5117167

tlttf wrote:

Redflag wrote:

tlttf wrote:Yes they were wrong Red, however they did declare what they were claiming for and didn't write false receipts. As for Paedo's your walking a dodgy line there my friend and should be aware of allegations without proof. I'm sure Ivan will have a word.

It has been announced on the TV news a person that was abused gave an interview to reporter and the Tory MP concerned was the MP for Chester plus advised the Maggot during her reign of terror plus the two inquiries that they set up where shredded and let 23 nasty pieces of work away with it. So why do you not mention the wrong doings of the Tory and L/Ds when it comes to the scandal of EXPENSES your just as bad as your party tittf they still will not take RESPONSIBILITY for the TWO & HALF years they have been in power or all the fcuked up policies they have brought in.

Do you believe all you hear Red?



Sponsored by Rapid Solicitors
Victim says sorry for claim top Tory was his abuser


Published on Saturday 10 November 2012 06:00

A child abuse victim last night apologised to former Tory Party treasurer Lord McAlpine after confirming that he was not the man responsible for abusing him as a teenager.

SIn a statement quoted by the BBC, Mr Messham said: “After seeing a picture in the past hour of the individual concerned, this (is) not the person I identified by photograph presented to me by the police in the early 1990s, who told me the man in the photograph was Lord McAlpine

Whoops!

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/victim-says-sorry-for-claim-top-tory-was-his-abuser-1-5117167

Here we go again tittf, I am not supposed to believe everything I hear BUT you are allowed to believe the SHYTE your party says is that because this gov't is going to be as scandal ridden (financial and sexual) as the Maggots gov't I will leave you with an old saying.

THERE IS NO SMOKE WITHOUT THE FIRE

Come on Red once you realise they're all at it life gets easier, as a matter of interest I'm a libertarian that believes in minimal government interference whoever they may be.
Here's another of your alternatives in action.


Margaret Hodge's family company pays just 0.01pc tax on £2.1bn of business generated in the UK
Margaret Hodge, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, is facing embarrassing revelations over the tax affairs of her family company just days before she is due to lead the grilling of US companies over controversial tax arrangements.
London 2012 Olympics: Government furious over Margaret Hodge's criticis of Games budget
Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, faces potential embarrassment over the tax affairs of her family business Stemcor Photo: DANIEL JONES
Helia Ebrahimi

By Helia Ebrahimi, Senior City Correspondent

The Labour MP has been one of the fiercest critics of tax avoidance by companies such as Starbucks, Google and Amazon. However, she is likely to face questions over the limited tax paid by Stemcor, the steel trading company in which she owns shares and which was founded by her father and is run by her brother.

Analysis of Stemcor’s latest accounts show that the business paid tax of just £163,000 on revenues of more than £2.1bn in 2011. However. it is not known whether the company – which made profits of £65m – used similar controversial tax avoidance measures criticised in the past by Mrs Hodge.

Stemcor’s tax bill to the exchequer equates to just 0.01pc of the revenues it booked through its UK-based business. In accounts filed with Companies House, Stemcor revealed that despite generating about one third of its revenues in Britain, its UK tax contribution made up only 2.7pc of the tax the company paid globally.

There's much more regarding one of your alternatives so please read on!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax/9668396/Margaret-Hodges-family-company-pays-just-0.01pc-tax-on-2.1bn-of-business-generated-in-the-UK.html

It hadn't really registered with me that so much of our utilities were foreign owned - bit of a bummer, that, because it seems to me that state ownership of utilities, transport and public and social care services would be one of the better ways to move towards a fair and equitable society.
Corruption and greed are both it seems to me part of the human condition, so it's quite important that the necessities of civilised life - housing, warmth, education, pubvlic safety and care of the vulnerable - should be provided without reference to the profit motive. I know monolithic institutions are often slow to act and wasteful of resources, but it ought to be possible to build in a system of checks and balances to keep things working smoothly enough to keep the population (voters!) reasonably safe and well served.
Operating essential public services for profit leads, as far as I can see, to more expensive (because shareholders want profits) and less effective (because one way to increase profits is to reduce staffing numbers and/or quality) services, which is surely in no-one's interest?

tlttf wrote:Come on Red once you realise they're all at it life gets easier, as a matter of interest I'm a libertarian that believes in minimal government interference whoever they may be.
Here's another of your alternatives in action.


Margaret Hodge's family company pays just 0.01pc tax on £2.1bn of business generated in the UK
Margaret Hodge, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, is facing embarrassing revelations over the tax affairs of her family company just days before she is due to lead the grilling of US companies over controversial tax arrangements.
London 2012 Olympics: Government furious over Margaret Hodge's criticis of Games budget
Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, faces potential embarrassment over the tax affairs of her family business Stemcor Photo: DANIEL JONES
Helia Ebrahimi

By Helia Ebrahimi, Senior City Correspondent

The Labour MP has been one of the fiercest critics of tax avoidance by companies such as Starbucks, Google and Amazon. However, she is likely to face questions over the limited tax paid by Stemcor, the steel trading company in which she owns shares and which was founded by her father and is run by her brother.

Analysis of Stemcor’s latest accounts show that the business paid tax of just £163,000 on revenues of more than £2.1bn in 2011. However. it is not known whether the company – which made profits of £65m – used similar controversial tax avoidance measures criticised in the past by Mrs Hodge.

Stemcor’s tax bill to the exchequer equates to just 0.01pc of the revenues it booked through its UK-based business. In accounts filed with Companies House, Stemcor revealed that despite generating about one third of its revenues in Britain, its UK tax contribution made up only 2.7pc of the tax the company paid globally.

There's much more regarding one of your alternatives so please read on!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax/9668396/Margaret-Hodges-family-company-pays-just-0.01pc-tax-on-2.1bn-of-business-generated-in-the-UK.html

As I have said before tittf , go into your own parties cupboards and see how many skeletons are hiding there, then come back and cast up about the Labour party how many of the Tories today are fiddling there Expenses renting out there second homes to fellow MPs while charging the tax payer an arm and a leg for it while still claiming there own fiddle with there expenses. Just take a look at the two inquiries the Jillingham and Waterhouse inquiries both of them covered up letting 23 pieces of nastiness away with child abuse, these where held within the Maggots time in office, is the same thing going to happen this time with Scam..er..on looking for a SCAPEGOAT.

Redflag wrote:

bobby wrote:Ivanhoe said: booby, if you dont know yourself that Tony Blair took Labour to the right for 13 years, then there's no hope for you.

Firstly Ivanhoe, I suffered the loss of two businesses because of Conservative recessions, and also had to sell my home both times, it was because of the continued growth and stability Labour gave us that I am now quite a wealthy man and can employ others. Had you have had your way, and Labour where led by someone in the mould of Michael Foot, we would have had 30 years of real right wing Tory Government.
Ivanhoe, I am not as obsessed by right and left as you are. I am more interested in right and wrong.
You have been prattling on for ages about New Labour being Thatcherite, for no other reason than they helped business to flourish. Tell me my old fashioned Knight, how else do you think all of the benefits of Blair’s Labour funded things like the Winter Fuel Allowance and the minimum wage, do you really think Blair had the Goose that laid the Golden Egg, no of course not his exchequer got funds mainly from the Tax Take, which of course you can only take whilst people are working and people can only work whilst there are Companies to employ them. You really need to get on grip on what the real world is all about, I don’t care if you call parties conservative with a big C or a small c, or if you call Labour just Labour or New Labour, all I will say is for you to keep saying Blair was Thatcherite is a total load of bollocks, they are and have been Labour, but unlike you they needed and did change with the times and did.

What do you think the UK would be like now, if Blair hadn’t won his landslide victory in 1997, I personally shudder to think, but then I guess there are more than one dinosaur around, its just that you are the only one on these boards.

I agree with you up to a certain point bobby, Tony Blair had to do what he had to do to get the normal tory voter to vote Labour that is how we got a landslide in 1997 but he never forgot about the every day Labour member/voter but maybe he took us a bit too far to the right and that is what a lot of people did not like about him, but I would never say that Tony was a Thatcherite.

Blair's father was a Tory. Blair embraced Thatcher's right wing free market from 1997. End of story.

Ivanhoe said: Blair's father was a Tory. Blair embraced Thatcher's right wing free market from 1997. End of story.

Ivanhoe, My Paternal Grandfather who had including my Dad 14 Kids, was apparently a right miserable git, something akin to what I think you to be, yet my old Dad woke up happy and remained that way till something serious happened. But according to you, If a person is of a type then the children must also be the same. Why else would you say such rubbish as, because Tony Blair’s Father was a Tory so Tony Blair must also be one. I have explained in my previous post how and why Blair moved to the right (but no where near as far as you keep implying) but you with your myopic look on politics can not see further than the nose on your face.

And for you to say that Tony Blair was Thatcherite shows just what a no nuffin sod you are, and this story will only end when you stop posting your continual crap. So you keep posting your nonsensical drivel and I will keep popping up to tell the truth of the matter.

Ivanhoe, Yesterday I asked you a simple question, even simple enough for you to understand, The question was:

"What do you think the UK would be like now, if Blair hadn’t won his landslide victory in 1997,"

An answer would be nice Ivanhoe.

bobby wrote:Ivanhoe, Yesterday I asked you a simple question, even simple enough for you to understand, The question was:

"What do you think the UK would be like now, if Blair hadn’t won his landslide victory in 1997,"

An answer would be nice Ivanhoe.

So sorry bobby, I forgot. If the Tory's had regained power in 1997, Britain would be in the same shitty mess as it is now. There, is that better ?

bobby wrote:Ivanhoe, please read the question again, if you are having a problem doing that, just ask and I will re write it in even simpler terms.

Okay bobby, if you could write it simpler, that would make me happy. Ta!

How about this for simplicity?

Thatcher sold the Nation's property, and Cameron is finishing the task.

Why both of them are not in Jail is a mystery to the Honest Man.

oftenwrong wrote:How about this for simplicity?

Thatcher sold the Nation's property, and Cameron is finishing the task.

Why both of them are not in Jail is a mystery to the Honest Man.

Well put.

It's a real worry - I did see the parallel re NHS - not really sure what a single voter might do about it, other than agitate, which, while personally satisfying, doesn't really meet the case.
Seems we might be heading into a grim future - I do hope the people who say Cameron won't get another term are right.

boatlady wrote:It's a real worry - I did see the parallel re NHS - not really sure what a single voter might do about it, other than agitate, which, while personally satisfying, doesn't really meet the case.
Seems we might be heading into a grim future - I do hope the people who say Cameron won't get another term are right.

The British largely are thick enough.

oftenwrong wrote:How about this for simplicity?

Thatcher sold the Nation's property, and Cameron is finishing the task.

Why both of them are not in Jail is a mystery to the Honest Man.

Your quite right OW, him and Landsley handed over 49% of OUR NHS to the bloody private health care and virgin care had there running shoes on for that one, and from what I have heard its virgin care that is the worst performer I thank God I live in Scotland Scam..er..on and Landsley can not get there bloody hands on OUR NHS.

boatlady wrote:It's a real worry - I did see the parallel re NHS - not really sure what a single voter might do about it, other than agitate, which, while personally satisfying, doesn't really meet the case.
Seems we might be heading into a grim future - I do hope the people who say Cameron won't get another term are right.

Here in Scotland Noah was still building his Ark was the last time that Scotland voted Tory boatlady, and the next time will be when Hell Freezes over the Maggot ensured that would never ever vote Tory.

Almost tempted to move to Scotland on that account

boatlady wrote:Almost tempted to move to Scotland on that account

I do not know if you know the reason for Scotland's Hatred of the Tories, when the poll tax was brought in the Scots got it first a year before it was roll out in England and as you know it was the unfairest of all taxes (example one street bought houses on one side council on the other the bought houses where 5 bedroom 2 bathroom homes paying £1800.00 in rates after the poll tax that went down to £1100.00 and some of the people in the council houses where paying more than £1100.00 per year) and that is just part of what the Tories did to us Scots unemployment was very high that is why London and the south have so many Scots still living there I myself worked and lived in London in fact that is where I met my partner. As for you been tempted to come and live in Scotland if the gov't here get there way for independence we will have a Tartan Tory running Scotland so we are trying our best so that we stay part of the UK.

Tory Lookalikes Number 27 - Michael Gove and Joe 90





Can this bloke look any more stupid...?

In the case of Gove all he has to do is open his mouth and he sounds as stupid as he looks.

I don't personally derive significance from "search-engine" statistics, but the frequency of enquiries to Google or Bing etcetera which lead to (twitter's) twimg.com website is only 5.2% of the total.

Presumably twitterers usually know where to find what they want from that URL.

oftenwrong wrote:How about this for simplicity?

Thatcher sold the Nation's property, and Cameron is finishing the task.

Why both of them are not in Jail is a mystery to the Honest Man.

Maybe when Labour get back into power in 2015 OW, they will find enough evidence to put the whole lot of Tories in Broadmoor.

tlttf. Further to the pack of lies which you were so happy to post about Margaret Hodge, I see that 'The Daily Telegraph' issued an apology. How strange that you didn't feel inclined to post that here too!

Margaret Hodge MP - apology

Margaret Hodge MP - Contrary to our report “Hodge faces challenge over family firm’s taxes” (Nov 20), Stemcor, in which Ms Hodge has a small shareholding, has not abused transfer pricing to avoid tax. We accept that there is no inconsistency or hypocrisy in Ms Hodge criticising other companies for tax avoidance and apologise to her for any contrary impression.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/9740964/Margaret-Hodge-MP-apology.html

Ivan wrote:tlttf. Further to the pack of lies which you were so happy to post about Margaret Hodge, I see that 'The Daily Telegraph' issued an apology. How strange that you didn't feel inclined to post that here too!

Margaret Hodge MP - apology

Margaret Hodge MP - Contrary to our report “Hodge faces challenge over family firm’s taxes” (Nov 20), Stemcor, in which Ms Hodge has a small shareholding, has not abused transfer pricing to avoid tax. We accept that there is no inconsistency or hypocrisy in Ms Hodge criticising other companies for tax avoidance and apologise to her for any contrary impression.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/9740964/Margaret-Hodge-MP-apology.html

One of his MPs Maria Miller is under investigation for her H.O.C. expenses, just remember Ivan not to say sorry if it is proved wrong, which I do not think it is after all one of the Tory MPs claimed expenses for duck house and another one claimed to have his MOAT cleaned.

Pickles tried to change the terms and conditions of employment in his department without even the semblance of negotiation, and this was the result:-
 
Eric Pickles cost taxpayers £90,000 over ‘reckless’ case
 
British taxpayers face a £90,000 legal bill after Eric Pickles’ “reckless and political” attack on the Public and Commercial Services union was ruled unlawful. The Department for Communities and Local Government had tried to unilaterally end a decades-old system for collecting union subscriptions through salaries – an arrangement that costs the department just £300 a year to administer.

But a High Court judge ruled that Pickles’s move was a breach of contract and must be reversed, and that the DCLG will have to pay the union’s legal costs as well as its own. The judge agreed with the union that having union subscriptions deducted through salaries – known as ‘check off’ – forms part of DCLG staff members’ contracts and therefore could not be withdrawn without consent.

PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: “It is staggering that Eric Pickles pressed ahead with this reckless and political attempt to undermine our union in his department. Pickles has very serious questions to answer about why he decided to spend tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money fighting to scrap something that costs less than £30 a month.”
 

 
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/09/03/eric-pickles-cost-taxpayers-90000-over-reckless-case/
 
(To put that £300-a-year charge into perspective, Pickles' office spent £42,225 of taxpayers' money on snacks in just seven months in 2012 - and he's got the figure to prove it.)

He was also told to pay the Unions legal expenses to boot it would of been fairer if they had to come out of his own pocket, and it would have been a good lesson maybe to stop trying to inflict Tory Ideology on the entire UK.
 
As for his snack bill the OBESE BACKSTUD has run up that should also should come out of HIS pocket, because that is not a snack bill with that amount it's more like a restaurant bill.  It sounds to me as if he is dining out for breakfast Lunch and Dinner at one of the best eateries within Westminister and I bet he even takes a car there.

Is there any alternative to the jaundiced Tory attitudes?

Yes of course. A book about the Chinese Revolution between 1945 and 1957 entitled "The Tragedy of Liberation" by Frank Dikotter has just been published by Bloomsbury at £25 (to keep it from The Poor?)

Mao Tse-tung proclaimed a People's Republic, and expelled foreigners. Toffs and landlords were murdered in great numbers. Deng Xiaoping supervised a land reform programme in Anhui province eliminating former landowners, and 6000 more were executed in Sichuan.

Britain's more spiteful Right-wingers might read, remark and digest such reporting, alongside documented events in the French Revolution of 1789.

What goes around, comes around.

Given that Mrs Hornby selfishly wishes to be driven to Gatwick tomorrow to fly to visit a chum in Canada, I just popped along to the garage to fill up with fuel and noticed that a litre now appears to cost £1.37.9. It's even dearer at some outlets in these parts. The last time I looked it was about £1.32  where I usually drop by.
 
I feel sure that if we had a Labour government we would be seeing mass demonstrations led by hauliers, with roads blocked etc., etc. One must assume that such action is simply a politically-motivated ploy by those who care not one jot about what is perpetrated under the Tories. Hypocrites all!
 
I guess we have reached the point where those who can afford fuel at the current price don't care what it costs, while those who can't have given up buying it and also ceased to have the energy to complain about such things.
 
Here's my prediction : Cameron ( or at least the Tories ) will once again form the government post-May 2015.  The LibDems will be irrelevant  (unless the British public are even more stupid than I imagine). That's how bad it has become and says a great deal for just how ineffective Labour is at countering the - admittedly very effective - propaganda which is regularly launched against them. But they are such easy targets.
 
Depressing - but there it is...