Do you know who I am

W

Warbler

At the Start
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
8,493
David Mellor, former conservative (well he's still a conservative and is proving it) but he decided to remind a taxi driver of his status on Friday who then secretly recorded him. Has echoes of an allegation from the Mitchell libel trial currently underway where it's been reported that the former Chief Whip is alleged to have said "a bit above your pay scale isn't it Mr Plod" to a police protection officer

"You've been driving a cab for 10 years? I have been in the cabinet, I am an award-winning broadcaster, I'm a Queen's Counsel, you think your experiences are anything compared to mine? Just shut up. Drive me whichever way you want, and keep a civil tongue in your head."
 
Didn't he also throw a handful of expletives towards the driver ?
Specifically:
"smart-a**** little git"
"sweaty, stupid little s**** "
"shut the f*** up, and get an education"
 
love it

last week we had Labour struggling with the fact that they don't actually like the people who vote for them ...with their flags and vans and general chavity

now we have a lovely reminder of why the tories have no connection whatsover with the working man..and this one was a typical tory in his day

1-1 at the moment in the showing your true colours stakes

neither instance was worthy of reporting imo...but thats the sad trivial media/twatter driven country we live in now
 
Last edited:
icebreaker said:
Didn't he also throw a handful of expletives towards the driver ?
Specifically:
"smart-a**** little git"
"sweaty, stupid little s**** "
"shut the f*** up, and get an education"
Click to expand...

I've no idea but that ain't good. He's bloody lucky the driver didn't stop the cab get out and drag from the seat and beat ten bells of shite out of him

Just as a matter curiousity, does anyone know the ethnicity of this driver? I'm curious that he's called him "sweaty"
 
Last edited:
I can't stand him. A worm.

but as for branding all Tories the same isnt that a bit third form ? More than a few labour mps who are full of themselves too. Just the same as in all walks of life.
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
I can't stand him. A worm.

but as for branding all Tories the same isnt that a bit third form ? More than a few labour mps who are full of themselves too. Just the same as in all walks of life.
Click to expand...


you were doing your share of 3rd form on the house & flags thread though Clive

at end of day..for different reasons the tories & labour have little connection with the people they manage to con to vote for them..most people my age know what the tories are about..they survive by hoping the next set of working class tories don't really know they are about...people my age know what they are about..but there is always new fodder ready to give them a go.

add to that the Lib Dem's leaking votes like they going out of fashion and the spivs party somehow managing to trade on immigration alone and cakewalk votes in
 
Last edited:
He's not a cabinet, shadow cabinet or even an mp now ec. He's a prat but a nonentity too.

its a bit dismissive to say that working class Tories "don't know" what they are voting for. Many people of all classes dislike the unions and the overblown public sector. Many "working class" people have done extremely well under the Tories. Nit least those who bought own council houses or started their own businesses.
 
clivex said:
I can't stand him. A worm.
Click to expand...

He did of course chastise an Israeli officer once in front of the media when he was at the FCO for shooting Palestinian kids for throwing stones at them or some other suitable over-reaction to an offence
 
clivex said:
He's not a cabinet, shadow cabinet or even an mp now ec. He's a prat but a nonentity too.

its a bit dismissive to say that working class Tories "don't know" what they are voting for. Many people of all classes dislike the unions and the overblown public sector. Many "working class" people have done extremely well under the Tories. Nit least those who bought own council houses or started their own businesses.
Click to expand...

I know he isn't an MP..do you think i've been asleep for 20 years?..no don't answer that:)

Many people don't like Unions .....but i've noticed those that don't join unions are always glad to accept the wage rises and terms & conditions that unions gain for those that actually paying them. My view of being in a union is its like having a solicitor fight for your wages and conditions..and only those that pay for representation should benefit....you would soon see none union people joining then when their colleagues who have paid to be represented get more wages than they do. In my opinion people who let other people's contributions to fatten up their pay are nothing but freeloaders with little principle.

Many people don't like overblown public sector...but soon complain when we don't have have enough border protection due to cuts. The same people wouldn't do the boring jobs in the public sector either..and the public sector pensions myth is just that..spoon fed to gullible people who believe anything negative purposely. The only gold plated pensions are those at the top..a bit similar to how the country works really..those at the top get more..those at the bottom get less..and at the top..there aren't as many..but as soon as they talk about pensions..they always delve into the small top bit to quote some fancy figures...then joe public automatically assumes..its everyone in the public sector.

Those working class people that voted tory in 79 just to get their council houses cheap..and i worked with a few who only voted for that reason..are some of those people now who will be crying because their are no council houses left for their kids and grandkids to have..what a brilliant idea it was eh?..sorry but to me that was an absolute disgrace doing it..those houses were there for a reason..to help people get a home to start out life with..not for virtually giving awy to short sighted greedy people to "buy" an election for the tories.

What do we hear now from people?..ooh my kids are 30 and can't afford a house..well thats what you get for selling out something that was there to help everyone..not just a few grasping hands in 79.

Selling off state assets isn't something to be proud of Clive..its a lazy way of politicianing..and when it comes back to bite those that fell for it years ago...who do they blame?..anyone bar themselves

like i said on another thread..at the top of the tree people stick together..at the bottom they fall for the selfish tricks that you applaud...the selling of council houses was never a smart move for the working classes...it was a smart move for the tories and a relative few who got houses that weren't theirs to have.
 
I think its a fair point that those who wont join a union but take the benefits are a bit two faced. I am talking more about the excesses of unions but that has largely passed now

Its not fair to lump all the public sector together but we all know that it has been stuffed with a lot of relatively well paid high pension "jobs" that produce nothing. We are all well aware of that.

The housing is down to overall stock, not selling off. Also it was not a electoral bribe in 79. 79 happened because' as Callaghan observed, there was a sea change (the public sector unions were heavily to blame too) and there was no going back. lets face it, this country was awful then. Sick man of europe and an international joke. Which ever way you look at it, the complete opposite is true now.
 
clivex said:
I think its a fair point that those who wont join a union but take the benefits are a bit two faced. I am talking more about the excesses of unions but that has largely passed now

Its not fair to lump all the public sector together but we all know that it has been stuffed with a lot of relatively well paid high pension "jobs" that produce nothing. We are all well aware of that.

The housing is down to overall stock, not selling off. Also it was not a electoral bribe in 79. 79 happened because' as Callaghan observed, there was a sea change (the public sector unions were heavily to blame too) and there was no going back. lets face it, this country was awful then. Sick man of europe and an international joke. Which ever way you look at it, the complete opposite is true now.
Click to expand...

the excess's of unions is no good i agree...the excess of anything is no good.....and nor is the excess's of the greedy idiot bankers who have brought this country to its knees..both things cripple a country..i'd argue the bankers have done more damage than the unions in the 70's...they have created hardships by creating cuts that have hit those in society that need most..the sick & elderly..and will continue to do so for many years.

It was a bribe Clive..absolutely so..yes they may not have needed to use it as such as Labour would have lost anyway..but it was a cheap bribe..and it worked..i remember having a few arguments at work with people who couldn't see the damage it would do. I actually worked with lifelong labour supporters who were in the 40's & 50's who voted Tory..just for the house.

Social housing is social housing.it was built for people who couldn't afford to buy a house. If those people in 79 wanted to buy a house..then go and buy one..there were plenty out there..and a damn sight easier to buy one then than it is now. Thatcher's lot played up the selfishness within people ..i'm alright jack attitude ...which she developed brilliantly through the 80's, oh don't worry about the next generation..get yer house cheap now..be a tory like us and own your own home..was the message..very clearly so.

I'm sorry but encouraging a generation of people to be selfish isn't a good thing and has in many ways damaged our society.

In the 70's for instance we would hear on the news how someone in the USA had been beaten in the street and folk had walked by..someone laid on the floor heart attack or what have you..people walked by. The story was about how people could walk by. Our reaction as a people was..how on earth could people be like that..what sort of a place is that...well..we found out from the 80's onwards..we developed the same "look the other way" I only care about me attitude. All part and parcel of i'm all right jack Thatcher's regime. Apart from filling pockets of certain people with money..they thought it were good...the country became morally corrupt..a selfish gloating society.
 
Last edited:
I was a Union member for 23 years, and not once did they secure a wage-rise beyond that which was already on the table.

Unions these days are basically there as damage-limitation engines; their main contribution being to sort-out the best possible redundancy deals.....which rather defeats the point. I can see why membership is so low - they are basically silver-medallists every time in wage negotiations.
 
EC. Just not true about housing. You are not understanding the housing market mate. Its supply and demand that dictates rent and prices. Frankly you can also argue why taxpayers should be throwing money at people who cant be disciplined or careful enough not to buy or privately rent. We ended up subsidising extremely low rents for people on decent salaries. Thats a fact.

As for this nostalgia about the 60s and 70s, its complete bollocks imo. I remember the 70s well and it was a much more downbeat sinister and violent time. The idea that everyone was one big happy family is a myth. There were plenty of pensioners found decomposing with a tin of pedigree chum in their hands because the first anyone could be bothered was when the smell got too much

The most selfish, gloating, thick headed, nasty and basically clueless idiots we have experienced were the unions in the 70s. no doubt about that. The bankers have caused damage on a big scale but on the other side of the coin , like it or not, they contribute a huge amount to the british economy. Far more than any other inidustry. That is undeniable. Nationlised British manufacturing in the seventies was one massive drain on the economy.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
I was a Union member for 23 years, and not once did they secure a wage-rise beyond that which was already on the table.

Unions these days are basically there as damage-limitation engines; their main contribution being to sort-out the best possible redundancy deals.....which rather defeats the point. I can see why membership is so low - they are basically silver-medallists every time in wage negotiations.
Click to expand...

Ultimately it should always simply be market rate. Anything else distorts. Below loses staff. Above increases costs and lessens competitveness and ultimately drives up inflation of course
 
Clive,,i didn't paint a glamorous picture of the 70's...it was poor..its worse now though is my point.

yes it looks like they contribute a lot Clive....the problem is..like the unions..they are judged on the worst bits..you don't mind judging the unions at their worst..but won't do it with bankers..which shows your allegiance to that area. The odd sentence here and there saying ..oh yes bankers dropped a bollock..but they really good really doesn't sort of compare to your outburst above about unions.

all i am saying is...society is better in some ways..but in otehrs..that actually don't cost money we are worse generally.
 
In the past..above lessened over large profits more like

any employee who thinks unions haven't helped them in the last 50 years is seriously deluding themselves imo...terms & conditions have to be negotitiated..they not given by generous employers.

you would have been on zero hours contracts for donkeys years for a start..instead they getting trendy now..in this time of supposed affluence...affluence for the few that is.
 
Grasshopper said:
I was a Union member for 23 years, and not once did they secure a wage-rise beyond that which was already on the table.

Unions these days are basically there as damage-limitation engines; their main contribution being to sort-out the best possible redundancy deals.....which rather defeats the point. I can see why membership is so low - they are basically silver-medallists every time in wage negotiations.
Click to expand...

And how many times did you go on strike? and for how long?

A union is essentially a union of people, it's only as strong as its membership. If they aren't prepared to fight and back up the sentiment then management can pretty well laugh in their face. I remember someone coming to me once asking for hardship payment from the Union funds because she'd be required to strike for just one day. I tried explaining that this was a fund set aside for genuine hardship in the face of sustaining an action, and not an inconvenience. She then got all arsey and tried to make out I was denying her access to the fund etc Obviously I gave her the form, she applied, and the application was rejected

There's a lot of people who expect their union to go in and secure deals for them, whilst their own membership ties both hands behind their backs. Very few unions ever made any gains without having to take some pain along the way, and even then, there's no such thing as a guaranteed result.

I'd happily wager that Grasshoppers union has never been on strike for more than 24 hours, because it wasn't an industrial union where there is a much stronger culture of sticking it out, and they all ran back to work the moment they realised they couldn't afford the extra bottle of sancere on the Mound on a Friday

It's a sign of the times if anything that the trade unions biggest weapon now isn't their membership, but rather European law, which for me at least is the most compelling argument for staying in Europe. American's bear arms to protect themselves against their own government's excesses, we need to bear Europe to protect ourselves against the Tories, and what frankly evil and cruel things they would visit on us otherwise. As Teresa May once said, they're the "nasty party"
 
clivex said:
EC. Just not true about housing. You are not understanding the housing market mate. Its supply and demand that dictates rent and prices.
Click to expand...

And what happens when you chop off supply Clive? Work it through

And more to the point, what would happen if supply were increased now?

I think the housing issue is the second most damaging thing our shite government's have visited on us (squandering North Sea oil revenue on tax cuts for the 'now' generation being the worst)

So many of the problems we face today, and indeed our own national malaise, can be traced back up stream to property prices. I have sympathy for someone in a service sector job who basically can't be arsed to offer a service to a customer when they can see 33% of their income going straight to feck all contributing bloody useless private landlord whose response to every challenge they face is to put the rent up.

This too causes inflation in the long run Clive and uncomeptitiveness
 
Whats wrong with tax cuts? More money in peoples pockets drives the economy which in turn drives growth and then ultimately tax revenues. Nothing wrong with that

Supply "cut off'? Since when? Ultimately its down to planning permission. If a huge number of new homes were built then the prices may come down or settle but not guaranteed at all. The population of london and the housing available has exploded in recent times.

I see no reason why there should be an explosion, at tax payers expense, in public housing.
 
Back
Top