Please tell me this isn't true - have just read that MPs will receive an extra £10,000 for working at home. Apologies if this has been posted before but this is the first time I have read it. My question is why?
//Right To Buy seemed fair at the time, but the long term effect was to destroy the social housing stock//
Social housing seemed fair when it was introduced, but in the long term led to misuse. Few, if any, handed back housing when they could afford to buy their own, and some were just fraudulently obtained and used from the start. It takes a tragedy like Grenfell to really appreciate how little a council knows about the actual use of its social housing.
Taking a small part of the sentence in an attempt to change what I wrote? How pathetic, and yet highly predictable. Well done Naomi, you reverted to type.
Teacake, still dodging questions - not to mention skulking behind someone who does have the courage to say what he thinks…. although with prejudice like this …
[i]I didn’t see the Labour voters turning down the offer, jno, and neither did I see subsequent Labour governments reversing the initiative[i]
er, what? You didn't see Labour voters turning down the (Tories') socialist offer of redistributing wealth, and you didn't see Labour governments rescinding it either?
Read on, jno - it helps in understanding the gist of any conversation. The fact is what I do see are Labourites, having enjoyed the fruits of that redistribution of wealth as you call it, now bleating on about the wicked old Tories selling council houses. Bizarre is one word for it.
The idea is to leave it on the back burner for one and a half hours, then jump in, in the hope of getting the last word in on any post. Mission complete with the full timers.