Reform

[Wisbech Eagle]

What are you waffling about. Somehow I’m the problem. Having sex with an adult is certainly a good starting point. Not picking up young girls and treating them as meat is another thing I don’t do.
It’s what you didn’t do years ago would be my question to you ?

As you well know I am not talking about the evil acts of evil men. I am talking about good people who could held us but are made to feel ostracised by the attitude of those who lump them all into the same category as the evil men. We need to divide them and bring them over to us. We need to support and encourage, no matter how hard that is or how long it takes.

What did I do? Quite possibly a lot more than you did. Well before this became a national scandal I became aware of some suspicious activity that today would be considered grooming. I reported it to the police, who reassured me they were aware of what I had identified and were monitoring it. We then moved and I lost touch.

 

[eaglesdare]

There you go, proving you cannot read. The elections weren’t cancelled. They were postponed. To try to save us some money. Their lawyers must have advised they would lose a legal case so decided not to throw any money at defending one.

This was 100% faux outrage by Reform dressed up as protecting democracy. Total bs. It was political opportunism.

If they were "postponed" as you put it to save money and had a legitimate reason then I'm sure a judge would have sided with them.

 

[Common Sense Club]

There you go, proving you cannot read. The elections weren’t cancelled. They were postponed. To try to save us some money. Their lawyers must have advised they would lose a legal case so decided not to throw any money at defending one.

This was 100% faux outrage by Reform dressed up as protecting democracy. Total bs. It was political opportunism.

So what the government did was illegal? And you would be happy with the government doing something illegal?

 

[cryrst]

As you well know I am not talking about the evil acts of evil men. I am talking about good people who could held us but are made to feel ostracised by the attitude of those who lump them all into the same category as the evil men. We need to divide them and bring them over to us. We need to support and encourage, no matter how hard that is or how long it takes.

What did I do? Quite possibly a lot more than you did. Well before this became a national scandal I became aware of some suspicious activity that today would be considered grooming. I reported it to the police, who reassured me they were aware of what I had identified and were monitoring it. We then moved and I lost touch.

What do you mean ‘more than what I did’
If I saw it happening I would have upped the anti and probably taken action myself. Albeit the police gave you lip service and behind your back labelled you a racist no doubt.

 

[kevlee]

If they were "postponed" as you put it to save money and had a legitimate reason then I'm sure a judge would have sided with them.

I do know that councils are amalgamating but cancelling elections when your backs against the wall is a pretty poor show and I think they were advised right at the start that if challenged they would lose. I heard Stephen Kinnock on the radio trying to justify it. After 10 minutes he sounded like he just wanted to throw in the towel.
Saving taxpayers money? Why not leave the ECHR and overnight you’ve saved about 50 billion!!!

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

If they were "postponed" as you put it to save money and had a legitimate reason then I'm sure a judge would have sided with them.

No they wouldn’t. Judges don’t decide on pragmatism. They decide on the law.

 

[eaglesdare]

No they wouldn’t. Judges don’t decide on pragmatism. They decide on the law.

Exactly! 👍

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

So what the government did was illegal? And you would be happy with the government doing something illegal?

I don’t know, but assume the government lawyers thought a court would rule against them. If an agreement was made between all the major political parties that it was in the country’s interests to postpone then the question of it’s legality would not have been needing an answer.

 

[Spiderman]

Exactly! 👍

First paragraph is interesting, they obviously didn’t send a working group to Truro

Starmer abandons plans to cancel May council elections in latest U-turn

Government agrees to pay Reform UK’s legal costs in further humiliation for prime minister

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Spiderman]

I don’t know, but assume the government lawyers thought a court would rule against them. If an agreement was made between all the major political parties that it was in the country’s interests to postpone then the question of it’s legality would not have been needing an answer.

So the courts decide on the LAW, your words. So they thought the courts would rule against them, so therefore it was illegal ( why else would the court rule against them unless it was against the law?)

 

[Common Sense Club]

I don’t know, but assume the government lawyers thought a court would rule against them. If an agreement was made between all the major political parties that it was in the country’s interests to postpone then the question of it’s legality would not have been needing an answer.

But they didn't agree, so what the government did was illegal...you are happy that the government was going to do something illegal...

 

[kevlee]

So the courts decide on the LAW, your words. So they thought the courts would rule against them, so therefore it was illegal ( why else would the court rule against them unless it was against the law?)

Technically not illegal but unlawful, still the same as against the law.

 

[Living In Hope]

It would be great to see a bit of balance on the Politics pages sometimes. On the local elections, no-one would have batted an eyelid about the postponements if Labour had been performing okay in the polls. The argument for delay had some merit, but it was also very politically convenient for Labour, and no doubt both things played a part in the decision. On the other hand it is entirely understandable that with democracy (in the USA) and freedom of speech / thought (in the UK) under attack that the decision would lead to an outraged response from some and disquiet from a lot more. Both positions are valid - there was good reason to delay the elections, and it is understandable that some are very upset by it and interpret it in a certain way.

But God forbid that many posters on here might understand that there is some validity in both sides of the argument. I can't wait for the abuse 🤣

 

[Common Sense Club]

It would be great to see a bit of balance on the Politics pages sometimes. On the local elections, no-one would have batted an eyelid about the postponements if Labour had been performing okay in the polls. The argument for delay had some merit, but it was also very politically convenient for Labour, and no doubt both things played a part in the decision. On the other hand it is entirely understandable that with democracy (in the USA) and freedom of speech / thought (in the UK) under attack that the decision would lead to an outraged response from some and disquiet from a lot more. Both positions are valid - there was good reason to delay the elections, and it is understandable that some are very upset by it and interpret it in a certain way.

But God forbid that many posters on here might understand that there is some validity in both sides of the argument. I can't wait for the abuse 🤣

I think you are right to make those points. The other alternative would have been for the postponement of the council restructuring and mayoral elections, giving regions sufficient time to plan those properly and allowing local elections to go ahead as scheduled. Their postponement looked too convenient to the sitting Labour Party to ignore.