Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

60 high rise blocks now with cladding that has failed tests

Worth a read:

" 25 Jun 2017The Observer
Observer Comment

Britain has had many governments, of many complexions. There have been one-party governments, coalition governments, minority governments and governments of national unity. In 1806, following the death of William Pitt the Younger, there was even a “ministry of all the talents”, intended to hold the country together. It did not last long and failed to end the war with France. Yet rarely if ever has Britain seen anything like the government we have now.
It is most unfortunate that we have so many makeweights and mediocrities collected together in the same place, at the same time, and under the same leader – especially when Britain is wrestling with Brexit, the most important decision in generations.
If the election delivered one clear message it was that voters were fed up with austerity and that anything that prolonged or worsened it was unwelcome. Has Theresa May, the notional prime minister but in reality the frontperson for the hard-Brexit fringe of the Conservative party, heard this message? She has not. May travelled to Brussels last week and told our EU partners that controlling immigration, not raising living standards, remained a priority.
May lacks a vision for the country. She appears oblivious to the firmly held view of her chancellor, Philip Hammond, and many others that the economy must come first. She ignores the warnings of senior figures, such as John Major, that leaving the European single market and customs union, as she is bent on doing, risks consigning millions of “just managing” people to a twilight world of declining wages, higher prices, failing services and rising debt.
May does not heed the independent voice of the governor of the Bank of England who states that, one year after the Brexit referendum, Britain is becoming measurably poorer. Ironically, the only growth areas are exports and tourism, thanks to a devalued pound. Britain’s biggest export, meanwhile, may soon be of skilled and able people.
How can a politician who constantly calls on the country to rally round, heal its divisions and pull together not grasp the obvious fact that, in order for that to happen, a consensus approach to a Brexit deal is essential? What is it about the developing crisis over a shortage of NHS nurses and doctors, caused by a sharp fall in EU applicants, that she does not understand?
Does May not hear the same worries that everybody else hears, from farmers prospectively lacking vital seasonal workers, from bankers and city institutions under mounting pressure to move jobs and business to Frankfurt and Paris, to universities fearful that European students and funding will shift elsewhere? Apparently not. As her grudging, selfdefeating approach to one of the easier Brexit issues – the rights of EU citizens – indicates, May still does not get it.
May is not malicious or wicked, just sadly lacking. A year on, the prime minister seems trapped in a June 2016 time-warp, doomed to endless reiterations of “Brexit means Brexit”, and from which nightmarish snare, because of the inconclusive nature of the election, she is not allowed, for the time being, to escape. This will change, of course, once Boris Johnson or Michael Gove or some other opportunist knifes her in the next Tory fight.
Yet why should the British people allow themselves and their country, in effect, to be led towards ruination by a gang of hard-right Eurosceptics whose dreams of lost empire are matched in impotent futility only by their glaring inability to justify the hard Brexit they have advocated for so long? The mood here and in Europe has changed. In the Netherlands, in Austria, in France, and now prospectively in Germany, the populists, the haters, the xenophobes and the ultra-nationalists have been vanquished. Look what happened to Ukip on 8 June. That train has left the station.
The hard Brexit argument that the EU is finished, that the eurozone is imploding, that the economies of the 27 are going under, now sounds as inept as a Boris Johnson interview with Eddie Mair. Britain is doing less well than any of the developed country economies and those of most EU members. And although the hard Brexit camp cannot bear to admit it, they know the public mood is changing, too, with opinion polls pointing in favour of a softer Brexit. Their bluff is being called, as David Davis’s first-day capitulation on the sequencing of negotiations showed. And their ability to scare and bully people is diminishing. Among moderate Tory and Labour MPs, fear of questioning Brexit is being overtaken, with good reason, by an even greater fear of plunging the country into a repeat of the Great Depression.
The urgent, undeniable cry linking Leavers and Remainers, the well-to-do and the less well-off, the mainstream left and right as well as Greens, Lib Dems and the SNP, is for a common-sense Brexit that enhances ordinary families’ economic prospects, not damages them; that guarantees citizens’ rights and opportunities, not limits them; that underpins essential public services and furthers the imperative, for example, of safe public housing; and that facilitates a positive future for our children and grandchildren, free of fear, chauvinism and crippling debt, in a society that is open to the world, to its people, and to new ideas.
You can see why this is all too much for May and her hard Brexit chums. The idea of truly acting upon a national consensus – indeed, the idea of following the settled national will – is far too democratic for people weaned on adversarial, winner-takes-all politics, class warfare, an enduring sense of entitlement, and longcoddled, gut prejudices about race, gender and religion. These are the base instincts of the past. Elements of our rightwing press revel in nourishing them – preferring discord over tolerance, anger over moderation, bile over guile, and mean-spiritedness over generosity. It’s a Manichean worldview that ends up hurting, not healing. But Britain’s instinct is not, on the whole, to be nasty, and these incitements (Enemies of the People, Crush the Saboteurs) are increasingly seen for what they are – unpleasant, unhelpful, unacceptable.
Post-Brexit Britain, in whatever shape it comes, does not and will not belong to a narrow constituency, however loud they shout. For it to work for Britain, it will have to be a vision based on consensus. An acceptance that the referendum vote of one year ago never mandated the Conservative party’s hard Brexit Tory faction to author the manner of our leaving the EU.
Post-Brexit Britain, in order to stay economically and societally healthy, needs a sensible degree of freedom of movement of labour. It needs students. It needs nurses.
Post-Brexit Britain needs as full as possible membership of the European single market – not mere “access”. Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party must get off the fence on this vital issue. Building a free, inclusive and prosperous society is not compatible with trade protectionism or rampant, unregulated markets – and Labour should say so plainly and with one voice.
And post-Brexit Britain must accept the rules and rights guarded by the European Court of Justice if it is to achieve its aims, especially in protecting the employees and their families who are most vulnerable to market upsets and business downturns. PostBrexit Britain needs the diversity, the flair and the inspiration only unrestrained, pan-European social and cultural exchanges can bring.
This is the shape of the Brexit package our country must seek. Is such a consensus possible? Its main elements are all within reach. Reluctant and divided though it clearly is, May’s cabinet must be led to understand that only a consensual Brexit package that works for all our society’s disparate groups, and the EU too, will be acceptable if and when negotiations conclude.
May or her successor must understand that any such final package must first pass the test of thorough parliamentary scrutiny and a free, unwhipped vote of MPs making their choice not according to party diktats but as a matter of conscience, in the interests of the country as a whole. This agreement can not be seen to be imposed, but freely, willingly embraced. A narrow margin of victory a year ago is not a licence to railroad, or silence. The post-Brexit Britain is one that everyone has a stake in. It’s not a carve-up. The alarming spectacle of the leader of the House of Commons, Angela Leadsom, suggesting last week that British broadcasters are being unpatriotic for raising questions about the government’s Brexit negotiating strategy reveals how dangerous the government’s isolation has become. It’s time the grown-ups took over. It’s time to talk about citizens, not saboteurs."

Another interesting commentary is :

That jeering sound you can hear is Europe laughing at Britain
Andrew Rawnsley
Andrew Rawnsley

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/24/brexit-europe-laughing-britain-unstable-government

The Graun full tilt an all that.

I don't think the movers an shakers of €uroland are laughing, far from it.

They are looking into the abyss, cos Ma Merkel et al cant keep this show on the road unless she hands over the golden key, the goal of goals.. and make the eurobun a transfer union.

Then they might have some chance..

Is it worth it? I don't know, but that's the price they have to pay if they want a true €uropean Union.

corbyn and labour mps condemning con/dup deal because of their views on
gay marriage and rights . well mr corbyn you have more mps because of their religion also condemn gays rights their religion want them killed
so are you going to sack those mps

it's certainly a case of pot and kettle when you consider labour's (corbyn's) stance and inaction on anti-semitism within the party

cynic the fact why has no one put the question to corbyn we no the bbc never will

you've already heard the answer
corbyn will reiterate that anti-semitism will not not be tolerated and strong action will be taken, unless your name is ken livingstone blah blah blah :-)

corbyn weekend speech to people at music fes was incite to riot

he should be charged with incitement to course a riot

Manuel,

If you are referring to comments made recently by Livingstone I think what he stated was factually and historically accurate.

Also considered it "fair comment" in the circumstances.

I think that was accepted by many Jews other than those hypersensitive or interested in political gain.

I think May shaking hands with Trump or Netanyahu was more offensive than Corbyn being prepared to talk about peaceful resolution of the Irish or other conflicts.
.
That is not trying to support terrorism, but pursuing the peaceful resolution of problems.

Not what the up and at "em" brigade can understand.

to be honest fred, i can't even remember what livingstone said, and i certainly wasn't offended by whatever it was - but then i am very thick skinned (and thick too)

I concur with the right orrible gentlemen's last sentence...Ho ho!

While on the intelligence theme, is Kay Burley thick as well as being irritating? Rhetorical question.

above post spot on if she comes on I turn off

above post spot on if she comes on I turn off

I must drink some more, I'm only seeing double.

85% of cars purchased over the last 2 years are on finance

I read somewhere that the finance leasing companies doing PCP could get stung because of the drop in the value of diesel vehicles