A) The government didn’t, councils did.
The actual facts are that this well documented liar claimed not to be one (another lie in itself) so the audience had to be given time to pick themselves up of the floor. He answers deliberately to outrage so he has less time to speak because the reality is he has nothing to say.
Even Grendel said Johnson got an easy ride and he did. He got a ranty student who descended rapidly from anythiung approaching coherance, and he was allowed to swap every answer around to Get Brexit Done.
The French government has a bigger stake in British railways (Network Rail aside). Seem to remember reading somewhere that the French government was also a recipient of British government handouts to failing franchises because of this.
A lead of 47% may have been sufficient to hand the Tories a handsome majority to the Tories in the past, and it certainly worked in the Thatcher years where they polled around 42%, but I'm afraid that what you fail to grasp is that we are no longer in a two party system. 2017 was a slight deviation from that, where Labour and the Conservatives gained over 82% of the vote but now more than ever it is looking like we will see other parties gain a large percentage of the vote again, throwing up all sports of distortions.
Hmmm, 83 saw a massive Tory majority as much because three parties (well, two parties and an alliance of two parties, for the anally retentive) took sizeable shares of the vote. Alliance weren't that far behind Labour at all in percentage terms.
Possibly, but I'd guess not because the Falklands had already been won by that and so despite the initial unpopularity, it was a great source of pride. The outcome of Brexit at this stage is ambiguous to say the least, and there's certainly not a unanimous verdict about its merits.
Just one question. Why should anyone be forced to sell something at well under the true value?
Interesting you are bringing the Tory's track record on house building into the debate .......It doesn't stand up to srcutiny "The Tories' 2015 manifesto committed the party to building 200,000 'Starter Homes', to be sold at a 20% discount and exclusively available to first-time buyers under the age of 40". Number of homes built under this scheme....a big fat 0. No homes built under flagship 2015 Tory housing pledge, watchdog finds
I agree with this. But it has been more than women that have been screwed. And the problem is we are all easy targets with pensions, both private and state.
Every chuffin election the DM publishes this inaccurate tired article having a dig at the BBC bias. Crack pot journalism at its finest. People should be embarrassed to read or refer to this comic.
You can get a big majority with only 35% of the vote. This is the problem with FPTP.
Excuse me. Cut out your normal crap. Jist point out a single time I have ever praised or said anything good about Boris.
Would you like to make a comment on the Labour history on the subject? They are as bad as each other.
Except when they do an article on the side of remain or anti Tory. Then it is acceptable. As has been shown several times before on here.
My name isn't Dim you melt
Haha very funny
Thats just bollocks dreamer and you know it, he was heckled and interrupted throughout unfairly
Well judging by the audience selected yes
How can you not agree that the audience was bias towards Corbyn
The gap between Labour pledges and what they intend to raise to meet it is far narrower than the Tories. And the Tories missed loads of existing commitments out of their manifesto. What ever magic money tree forest you think labour needs the Tories needs to many acres bigger. They’re either not ending austerity or their manifesto isn’t worth wiping your arse on.
