Get a life and stop whinging
Discussion
Kermit power said:
BeeRoad said:
Kermit power said:
Totally out of order in my view.
If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
Miserable sod.If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
Edited by SystemParanoia on Wednesday 15th December 15:03
SystemParanoia said:
Kermit power said:
BeeRoad said:
Kermit power said:
Totally out of order in my view.
If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
but you have no complaints about 13 years of labour wastage?If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
Miserable sod.
Was that some sort of quote for posterity?
Wurls said:
Kermit power said:
BeeRoad said:
Kermit power said:
Totally out of order in my view.
If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
Miserable sod.If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
ks that my taxes have been spent on over the years, then I'll happily take you up on it. I have no doubt it runs into thousands though.Just because there are other, greater misuses of all the money I am forced to give up, it doesn't mean that I can't also be pissed off about this one.
EDLT said:
thinfourth2 said:
A virtual fiver sayes he has to publicly apologise within a week.
I don't think anyone will bet against you.Why do I get the feeling that this is a response to the 956th letter sent by the same person about the same thing?
I don't expect an elected official to be so rude and childish to a member of public just because he dissagrees with them.
He is there to represent us not fking take the piss.
He should have just replied stating the benefits no need for saying he had a "sad life" whether you do or don;t mind the costs of the weding it is a legitimate question to ask and does not deserve ridicule.
He is there to represent us not f
king take the piss. He should have just replied stating the benefits no need for saying he had a "sad life" whether you do or don;t mind the costs of the weding it is a legitimate question to ask and does not deserve ridicule.
Kermit power said:
BeeRoad said:
Kermit power said:
Totally out of order in my view.
If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
Miserable sod.If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
In fairness (and I have to say I find the position of defending Bob Russsell who I have had quite encounters with over the years more than odd) he was convinced the letter was a deliberate "plant" from a local Labour activist. The evidence of where it came from if you know Colchester politics would suggest he is probably correct.
Bob Russell is the master of self publicity - the fact that it got him in the papers he probably thought a bonus.
Bob Russell is the master of self publicity - the fact that it got him in the papers he probably thought a bonus.
SystemParanoia said:
Kermit power said:
Because someone is spending my money against my will on a party to which I've not been invited? Absolutely!
but you have no complaints about 13 years of labour wastage?Globs said:
SystemParanoia said:
Kermit power said:
Because someone is spending my money against my will on a party to which I've not been invited? Absolutely!
but you have no complaints about 13 years of labour wastage?I'm all in favour of the monarchy. That doesn't mean I have to agree with spending silly amounts of money on their wedding, taking a working day out of most people's diaries and screwing up Central London for a day.
For the record, I'm equally opposed to public spending on frivolous b
ks like the Olympics and the Football World Cup bid. All these things are all well and good, but they should stand or fall on their own merits, without public money.Kermit power said:
For the record, I'm equally opposed to public spending on frivolous bks like the Olympics and the Football World Cup bid. All these things are all well and good, but they should stand or fall on their own merits, without public money.
Given the Olympics looks like costing us £12bn plus;- I think we should be complaining about that before the Royal Wedding, which will be _peanuts_ in comparison and could actually make money via tourism.ks like the Olympics and the Football World Cup bid. All these things are all well and good, but they should stand or fall on their own merits, without public money.Globs said:
Kermit power said:
For the record, I'm equally opposed to public spending on frivolous bks like the Olympics and the Football World Cup bid. All these things are all well and good, but they should stand or fall on their own merits, without public money.
Given the Olympics looks like costing us £12bn plus;- I think we should be complaining about that before the Royal Wedding, which will be _peanuts_ in comparison and could actually make money via tourism.ks like the Olympics and the Football World Cup bid. All these things are all well and good, but they should stand or fall on their own merits, without public money.Kermit power said:
Globs said:
Kermit power said:
For the record, I'm equally opposed to public spending on frivolous bks like the Olympics and the Football World Cup bid. All these things are all well and good, but they should stand or fall on their own merits, without public money.
Given the Olympics looks like costing us £12bn plus;- I think we should be complaining about that before the Royal Wedding, which will be _peanuts_ in comparison and could actually make money via tourism.ks like the Olympics and the Football World Cup bid. All these things are all well and good, but they should stand or fall on their own merits, without public money.I just think the complaint is petty and short sighted.
Kermit power said:
Totally out of order in my view.
If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
Christ, you're as bad as that bloke he replied to!If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
MikeyT said:
Kermit power said:
Totally out of order in my view.
If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
Christ, you're as bad as that bloke he replied to!If I wanted to get married in Westminster Abbey, doubtless bringing chunks of Central London to a standstill in the process, then even if I could arrange permission, I have no doubt I'd have to pay for the cost of the policing and everything else out of my own pocket.
What is unreasonable about someone questioning why royal wedding expenses should come out of the taxpayers' pocket rather than the pocket of the individuals getting married?
It would seem this MP has decided that this particular constituent is unlikely to vote for him, and as such he obviously feels he can treat him with contempt.
"The spirit of the nation will be lifted by having an extra holiday" he says. How many of his constituents can we assume are small business owners who will probably be cursing the loss of a day's revenue or the need to pay staff higher rates for the day?
baxb said:
Pesty said:
He is there to represent us not fking take the piss.
No, he's there to represent me (& a few others) & I'm more than happy with his response.king take the piss. My point was that agree or dissagree with the email mans worries about expenditure on this wedding. he deserved a respectful answer.
Its seems to me a lot of people on here thinks its a great reply only because they are of the opinion that it is money well spent, which to me misses the point of how an elected official should act regardless of who you agree with.
It could be you next when asking about cancer treatment/road policy/climate change (which he is a bog fan of)etc etc
Pesty said:
I don't expect an elected official to be so rude and childish to a member of public just because he dissagrees with them.
He is there to represent us not fking take the piss.
He should have just replied stating the benefits no need for saying he had a "sad life" whether you do or don;t mind the costs of the weding it is a legitimate question to ask and does not deserve ridicule.
Indeed. As eloquent as a 6th former.He is there to represent us not f
king take the piss. He should have just replied stating the benefits no need for saying he had a "sad life" whether you do or don;t mind the costs of the weding it is a legitimate question to ask and does not deserve ridicule.
Well, almost.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff