Jan 21 2013
The Daily Mail
Two stories here, both about Ed Willieband. The first story is about Willieband being a hypocrite and a piss taking snot ball. As if we needed telling that. He is like all the rest of his corrupt cronies; a limp-wristed, pasty faced Nancy-boy, whose bent as a nine bob note.
The second Article is from Richard Longjohns or whatever the fucking hacks name is. He maintains that Willieband is no Slaggy Thatcher and should never be allowed near 10 Downing Street.
I book him right on the Downing Street bit. As for Willieband being no Slaggy Thatcher, that all depends on what context Longjohns is talking about. If he means Thatchers Female and Willieband is probably Male, I suppose it is debatable. If on the other hand Longjohns means that Willieband won’t lay the groundwork to fuck the Country, it could be argued that the Country is already fucked. But he will never the less, still make a contribution to fucking it even more.
If longJohns means that Willieband wont fill his cabinet with Child Rapists, then I’m afraid he’s just talking total bollocks.
Longjohns says that he only reads the Guardian so we don’t have too. He’s having a Giraffe. As if I would trust that cunt to relay honest information… Nice try.. Twat.
Miliband accused of ‘total hypocrisy’ after attacking government car use while being driven around in £135,000 taxpayer-funded limo
Ed Miliband was today accused of ‘total hypocrisy’ after running up a £135,000 bill for a taxpayer-funded chauffeur driven limo while sanctioning attacks on cars used by government ministers.
The Labour leader faced calls to use public transport or invest in a bicycle instead of being driven around London in car paid for by the state.
It comes after Labour blasted transport minister Simon Burns for being driven home instead of using the train, accusing him of being ‘out of touch’ and telling ministers to ‘get out of their limos’.
Tory MPs said Mr Miliband should practice what he preaches and stop being picked up from his ‘multi-million pound house in Primrose Hill in a taxpayer-funded car’.
Instead he should buy a ‘bicycle and a hat with a bobble on top’ to get around town.
Official figures released in Parliament show Mr Miliband’s official car – provided to the Leader of the Opposition – has cost taxpayers £135,270.50 since the beginning of September 2010.
From September 2010 until March 31 2011, the vehicle cost the Cabinet Office £33,592.71. In the year from April 2011, the car cost £56,645.05 and from April 2012 until December 31 2012, the Cabinet Office spent £45,032.74.
The revelation is especially embarrassing for Mr Miliband after Labour attacked the government for its use of official cars.
- Ed Miliband calls for some powers to be clawed back from the EU (but refuses to promise a referendum)
- End ‘absolutely crackers’ rules which mean we pay £36million in child benefit to 24,000 families who do not even live in the UK
- Waiting on a freezing platform at 6am and not even getting a seat: Transport Minister FINALLY realises what it’s like to take the train to work
It emerged that transport minister Mr Burns was using an £80,000-a-year pool car to be driven from his home in Chelmsford, where he is MP, to Westminster every day.
He claimed he was able to work in the car but after a furious public backlash in the week when rail fares rocketed, he decided to let the train take the strain.
He was pictured waiting on the platform for the 5.58am, and was forced to stand in the corridor for the 36 minute journey from Chelmsford to Liverpool Street, London.
But Maria Eagle, Labour’s shadow transport secretary, used Mr Burns’s car travel to score political points.
‘No wonder ministers are so out of touch with the eye-watering cost of rail fares when they are spending tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money being driven around all day,’ she said.
‘They should get out of their limos and speak to those hard-pressed commuters who have this week seen the cost of their season ticket rocket by hundreds of pounds.’
Today Tory MPs seized on the remarks to say Mr Miliband should follow his frontbench colleague’s advice and ‘get out of his limo’ too.
Transport minister Simon Burns was criticised for being driven home to Chelmsford in a government car, so he let the train take the strain last week, and was pictured looking cold on the platform and then forced to stand
The figures for Mr Miliband’s car use were released in a parliamentary question tabled by Tory MP Chris Skidmore.
Mr Skidmore told MailOnline: Ed Miliband isn’t even in government yet he is still using taxpayer’s money to traipse across the country preaching the politics of One Nation, when it is hardly One Nation to be picked up from outside your multi-million pound house in Primrose Hill in a taxpayer-funded car.
‘He needs to have a long hard look at himself. At a time when hardworking people are struggling to pay the costs of transport it is unacceptable for Ed Miliband to be not practicing what he preaches.
‘I am sure Maria Eagle will want to be consistent in her approach and will be having a long, hard chat with her leader to ensure that there is no hypicrasy going on.’
Ian Liddell-Grainger said Mr Miliband should find alternative ways to get around to prove he is in touch with the public mood: ‘He would look fantastic in an anorak on the train. It would be the geek exactly where he should be.
‘He needs to cut his bill down, get a bicycle, an anorak and a hat with a bobble on the top.
‘There is complete hypocrisy here. It is just ridiculous. Every minister is trying to do what they can to go on public transport and reduce costs.
‘But where we have got a Labour frontbencher attacking a junior minister when her own leader is just flaunting it as well is just ridiculous. I think Maria Eagle should hang her head in shame.’
Matthew Sinclair, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: ‘Everyone in power owes it to taxpayers to look for ways in which they themselves can save money.
‘Any politician with access to a chauffeur-driven car must be looking to reduce the burden they are placing on the taxpayer for using that facility.’
Transport minister Stephen Hammond said: ‘The Government Car Service provides an allocated car for the Leader of the Official Opposition. This is consistent with the practice for the previous Leader of the Official Opposition.’
A Labour Party Spokesperson said: ‘When the Conservative Party was in opposition David Cameron was allocated and regularly used a Government car. David Cameron’s own transport minister has admitted Ed Miliband’s use of a car is entirely consistent with that practice.
‘Ed Miliband regularly uses public transport and attends many official functions and meetings in his role of the Leader of the Opposition.’
Is Red Ed the new Margaret Thatcher? No. Miliband shouldn’t be allowed within 100 miles of Number 10 Downing Street
As I have explained previously, I only read the Guardian so you don’t have to. I also make a point of listening to the political interviews on Radio 4’s Today programme to save you the early morning upset of hurling your bowl of cornflakes at the wireless.
I know, I know. It’s a dirty and dangerous job, but someone’s got to do it. There’s no need to thank me. And occasionally the time I invest in this drivel pays off in spades.
Take yesterday, for instance. The Guardian devoted four pages to the proposition: ‘Could Ed be Labour’s Thatcher?’
Under the headline: ‘Rise of the Iron Man,’ the paper concluded that: ‘The Labour leader might just be the next radical Prime Minister the country has been waiting for.’
Before I’d finished laughing at this preposterous attempt to draw parallels between milksop Miliband and the Iron Lady, up popped the boy himself on Today to demonstrate precisely why he shouldn’t be allowed within 100 miles of No 10 Downing Street.
Miliband may get away with spouting the odd scripted soundbite on TV or during Prime Minister’s Questions. But stick him in front of a microphone for 15 minutes and he unravels spectacularly.
- Ed Miliband calls for some powers to be clawed back from the EU (but refuses to promise a referendum)
- Miliband accused of ‘total hypocrisy’ after attacking government car use while being driven around in £135,000 taxpayer-funded limo
- Half of people want to stay in the EU if Cameron can claw back powers in major boost for the PM on eve of his Big Speech
Even the programme’s pro-Labour, pro-EU presenter Jim Naughtie became audibly exasperated with Miliband’s evasion and inability to bring any ‘clarity’ to the debate.
I listened to the interview again on the BBC website, thinking it might make more sense second time around. No such luck. You’d get more ‘clarity’ from Bill And Ben The Flowerpot Men.
I had hoped to take a shorthand note of his answers and address them one by one. But he never actually answered a question in anything approaching English. Or any other known language, for that matter. So I’ll do my best to give you the gist of it.
Take the small matter of whether Call Me Dave is right to offer the British people a referendum on Europe. (Eventually, definitely/maybe, when the time is right, believe it when you see it, the ballot’s in the post, etc . . .)
This was what Milibean had to say: ‘I don’t think the contested ground in this . . . is the need for change, the contested ground is how do we change it.’
Apparently, Cameron is only promising a referendum because he’s the prisoner of a ‘neuralgic’ Conservative Party. Last time I looked, ‘neuralgic’ described an intense, intermittent pain in the head.
Miliband was certainly giving me a headache. Was there much more of this? Sadly, there was.
‘Putting up a big flag saying ‘exit’, Britain’s about to get out, is . . . a hopeless negotiating strategy because I think the idea that people are more likely to accede to your demands if you say well actually we’re just going to walk away and Britain can sort of be written off, I honestly don’t think that’s going to help us.’ That could have been Two Jags talking.
Miliband insisted on answering a question which he hadn’t been asked. As Naughtie, to his credit, kept reminding him: Dave isn’t promising an in-out referendum.
But an in-out referendum would have ‘big costs’ for Britain, said Miliband. Are you deaf, Ed? Or just thick? He’s not offering ‘in-out’. So let’s try again. Do you accept that the British people wanted powers repatriated from Brussels?
Up to a point, Lord Naughtie.
For instance? ‘Regional policy, the way a national government can have an industrial policy, I think there are areas . . .’ He just couldn’t think of any others off the top of his head.
No, the only reason Ed could see for ever holding a referendum would be if more powers were ceded to the EU, which is a non-runner under any government. But even if that were to happen, Labour would still find a way of ignoring the will of the British people, just as Gordon Brown did over the Lisbon Treaty.
What about immigration? Surely Ed had to accept that on both EU membership and immigration, especially the forthcoming influx from Romania and Bulgaria, Labour was out of step with the majority of the British people.
Ed explained that he believed passionately in a diverse, multicultural Britain which worked for all . . .
Yes, yes. Get on with it.
Well, um, we do need to address employment agencies who only hire foreign workers. And, er, slum landlords and bosses who pay less than the minimum wage.
Seriously? Is that honestly all that concerns the British people about the unprecedented mass immigration the Labour government, of which you were a member, imposed on an unwilling nation?
You should come to my constituency, said Miliband. Really?
The idea that the pubs and clubs of Doncaster reverberate to passionate debate about the iniquity of foreigners being paid less than the minimum wage is beyond absurd.
Even Naughtie had trouble suppressing an incredulous snort. Miliband was probably confusing the monkey-in-a-rosette, working-class Labour constituency he allegedly represents with the bien pensant constituency he actually lives in — Guardian Central, London NW5 (Not Quite Hampstead, darling), where a terraced house costs £2 million and the only immigrants you ever meet come in to clean your home and fix the plumbing.
Never mind, let’s change the subject. Did Ed agree with his brother’s recent speech in which he said that any future Labour government would have to stick within the Coalition’s ‘spending envelope’?
Er, yes and no. Mostly, no. But what really matters, Jim, is ‘Tory tax cuts for millionaires’ and ‘cutting too far, too fast’. That’s what he and David agreed upon.
But I’ve read David’s speech, said Naughtie. And I’ve spoken to him more recently than you, said Ed. Na, na, na, na, na.
That’s probably because David’s too busy filling his boots making speeches and ‘advising’ Sunderland FC to appear on the radio, Naughtie should have said but didn’t.
OK, let’s try again. Could Ed ever see David making a comeback as part of the Shadow Cabinet?
(Subtext: after you stitched him up over the leadership, could he ever trust you again, let alone work with you?)
Cough, splutter. Look, er, David has a great contribution to make to the Labour Party, but for the time being ‘from the front line, not the front bench’.
We’ll take that as a ‘no’ then. And now here’s Gary with the sport.
There you have it. This waffling Left-wing weirdo, son of a Marxist professor, is being touted by the Guardian as the Son of Thatch.
You couldn’t make it up.
I defy anyone to listen to Miliband’s Today programme yesterday and conclude: This might just be the next radical Prime Minister the country has been waiting for.
Could Ed be Labour’s Thatcher?
Flannel sheets are back in fashion as a result of the cold snap. They are warmer than nylon and silk and help cut fuel bills, according to Debenhams. The last time flannel sheets were popular was before the advent of central heating in the Fifties.
If this weather keeps up, how long before we see a revival in the market for rubber hot water bottles, electric blankets, long-johns and Winceyette nighties?
For a variety of reasons, experienced police officers are leaving in droves. They have to be replaced.
So what on earth was Home Secretary Theresa May thinking when she slashed starting salaries by £4,000 to just £19,000 a year?
How does paying new PCs less than they could get working for McDonald’s help rebuild trust between the Government and the Police Federation, currently at rock bottom because of Plebgate?
It smacks of punishing them through the pay packet. More to the point, £19,000 a year is seven grand less than the cut-off point for benefit payments under the Coalition’s welfare reforms.
I’m the first to criticise the Old Bill, but what kind of country pays coppers not just less than they could get flipping burgers but less than they could claim on the dole?
Bernard Matthews put his name on the packet. He didn’t just sell turkeys, he sold consumers his own confidence in the product.
Supermarkets pay a fortune for the trust which name-brand recognition brings.
So we can understand why the man behind the processing company which packed out its budget beef burgers with horse flesh didn’t put his name on the tin.
I can’t see there being much call for Dirty Larry’s Burgers. Can you?
More rabbit than Sainsbury’s
Mum Alison Savory is boycotting Boots the Chemist after she found her sons, aged six and eight, playing with a purple vibrator they had found on a shelf near the check-out at her local store in Crowthorne, Berks.
Apparently, they thought the sex aid was some kind of toy.
If Boots insists on selling vibrators, maybe it needs to make sure they are displayed discreetly out of the reach of innocent children, who can’t tell the difference between a Rampant Rabbit and Bugs Bunny.
Actually, on reflection, it’s probably best if Boots gets out of the sex aid trade altogether. What if this vibrator had been picked up by a short-sighted old lady who mistook it for an electric tooth brush?
I hate to think.