Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.


Sugar Ape
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

I don't think one is more important than the other.

(That doesn't surprise me despite the decent answer being the 16/19 year olds trying to better themselves deserve a leg-up.) 

 

Jo does

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

(That doesn't surprise me despite the decent answer being the 16/19 year olds trying to better themselves deserve a leg-up.) 

 

Jo does

 

 

But you're only looking at one side of the coin (again) in focusing on what was cut and ignoring what was brought in to replace it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bjornebye said:

EMA was cut by the Coalition as well.

 

You tell me? 

 

It was replaced by a bursary scheme, which was admittedly cheaper, but the poorest students got more than they did before. You make it sound like it was cut and nothing replaced it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

It was replaced by a bursary scheme, which was admittedly cheaper, but the poorest students got more than they did before. You make it sound like it was cut and nothing replaced it.

Ok so my ex was a trainee nurse on a Bursary and they were all worse off than before. But ok. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cloggypop said:

Lib Dems want more austerity then. 

 

Liberal Democrats say government should run permanent spending surplus

 

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2019-liberal-democrats-permanent-spending-surplus-1047923

The Lib Dem plans are in some ways stricter than the fiscal rules introduced by George Osborne when he was Chancellor - raising the prospect of a swift return to austerity.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Remind me to bump this post when Labour finish third in Wimbledon.

More SD lies. How he hasn't been banned and properly filled in is beyond me. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They haven't got a 3rd place play off at Wimbledon. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Defra said that access would remain unchanged after the coalition forest sale. And the only trees that would have been cut down would be the ones already being cut down in commercial woodland.

Have you ever read Animals of Farthing Wood? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mudface said:

Amazing. Bjornebye's right about you, you really will defend anything 'your' party do, right down to voting for a failed Tory policy that even they dropped like a hot potato.

 

Weird.

 

I'll defend anything which is being misrepresented. If you want me to stop, then stop misrepresenting the things my party has done. Simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...