Lord Adonis to return to Rail & Infrastructure with new Goverment Body.

[furnessvale]

A lot of false memories when it comes to HS2. Labour adopted HS2 as a policy before an election it seemed likely to lose. It has since been admitted they adopted it because they felt they had to be seen to the "party of the north" and that the Tories would cancel it. The Tories (and Liberal Democrats) got in on cue. They didn't sit down with Adonis and let him make them tea, instead they played the political game and decided to out-north the Labour party by keeping it. HS2 is what's known as "a political football". Given the weak birth it was given and all the subsequent grief it has caused both parties, and the sheer un-cancellability of it now it has been kicked off (well neither of them want to be seen as the ones that ended it), I dare say if there is consensus about anything to with HS2 it's that politicians probably wish they'd never ever had to hear of it!!!

The tone of your post leads me to believe that, rather like myself, your forum name gives a clue as to where you live.

 

[Camden]

From Camden but no longer live in the borough. And wouldn't have been affected by the station works anyway if that's what you mean?

No my reading of HS2 is simply as it is. If you want me to pick holes in HS2 it's not the southern end I'd criticise but the northern end, where it gets really messed up. You can legitimately criticise HS2 simply for being rubbish, I think!

My context is I work in the north of England Monday to Friday (and sometimes weekends), and have done for the past 10 years solid, and before that sporadically. Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds. In fact I "live" in the north far more and have done for a long time now!! I take as much notice of the politics and issues as much as anyone else up here, and perhaps more so because of my work.

 

[Oliver]

A man of few principles. He's been a LibDem councillor, Labour minister and now he's working for the Conservatives.

I have voted for Labour, Libdem and Tories over the years, when each has represented the sensible middle ground. So do I have no principles?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I have voted for Labour, Libdem and Tories over the years, when each has represented the sensible middle ground. So do I have no principles?

Well said and I do like the proviso that you state. We do live in a democracy with the right to vote for whoever we choose, rather the blindly following one particular party "because my ancestors voted for them all the time".

 

[Camden]

I think there is a bit of a difference between selecting a party to vote for, and a politician nailing their colours to the mast so that people know what they actually stand for when selecting them.

If a candidate in an election has variously been a member of numerous parties, all opponents to each other, then in placing your cross by their name I think it's a reasonable thought that you may as well flip a many sided coin as to what you will actually wind up with.

Of course though Lord Adonis won't be standing for election anyway. He has been chosen for us, not by us.

 

[glbotu]

I have voted for Labour, Libdem and Tories over the years, when each has represented the sensible middle ground. So do I have no principles?

Not that having no principles is necessarily a bad thing. I would be very happy if politicians would occasionally change their mind when proven wrong, rather than doing what their principles tell them. What you are, is an educated voter, which is a good thing that we don't have enough of.

 

[Oliver]

Not that having no principles is necessarily a bad thing. I would be very happy if politicians would occasionally change their mind when proven wrong, rather than doing what their principles tell them. What you are, is an educated voter, which is a good thing that we don't have enough of.

Thank you. I also think Lord Adonis has not changed his views much, rather, political parties have changed theirs. I think he's the kind of person who wants to get things done rather than shout advice from the sidelines. Likewise Alan Milburn and Frank Field have found jobs within a Tory administration.

There is a difference if a person is elected under one party label and then decides to switch parties. In that case I believe they should always offer themselves for re-election.

 

[HowardGWR]

I see Andrew Adonis as a public servant (civil service type if you like). He is very clever and clear headed. I don't see him as a politician at all, only in the diplomatic side of it.

 

[67018]

Not that having no principles is necessarily a bad thing. I would be very happy if politicians would occasionally change their mind when proven wrong, rather than doing what their principles tell them. What you are, is an educated voter, which is a good thing that we don't have enough of.

This. It's hardly as if switching parties is a new thing, indeed William Gladstone and Winston Churchill spring to mind as two obvious historical examples.

If politicians remain loyal to their party come what may they are dismissed as mindless party hacks, and if the don't they have no principles. So they can't really win.

People here seem to be looking a gift horse in the mouth - some good may come of this appointment for the railways, and there are many worse people that could have been selected. (Imagine the recommendations of the 'Clarkson Commission' hock

 

[HowardGWR]

People here seem to be looking a gift horse in the mouth - some good may come of this appointment for the railways, and there are many worse people that could have been selected. (Imagine the recommendations of the 'Clarkson Commission' hock

Agree; incidentally, Adonis retains his Labour party membership. We can all be a member of a political party. When I was such a member, I found I had huge disagreement with fellow members, many of whom were environmental philistines and - er - financially naive, as well. Their hearts were in the right place though.

What impressed me was that he did his rail tour of the country with so little fanfare. IIRC it was 'discovered' he was doing so, rather than announced. In that connection, I remember Ken Clarke saying that being transport minister was one long geography lesson.

 

[misterredmist]

Regardless of LA's political persuasions , I wish him well and hope he does a darn good job for ALL of us.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think there is a bit of a difference between selecting a party to vote for, and a politician nailing their colours to the mast so that people know what they actually stand for when selecting them.

The wording of the statement in your posting that I have emboldened above and the other one of "race to the bottom" that is so often used on this website appears to come from the hypothetical "Socialist Book of Political Phrases" with a somewhat frenetic wish to use such terms in order to prove left-wing credentials.

 

[bnm]

There is a difference if a person is elected under one party label and then decides to switch parties. In that case I believe they should always offer themselves for re-election.

Whenever Andrew Adonis has come close to facing the parliamentary electorate, he has either resigned or withdrawn his candidacy.

I fail to see what others see in this quasi-politician.

 

[nuneatonmark]

I have voted for Labour, Libdem and Tories over the years, when each has represented the sensible middle ground. So do I have no principles?

I would say that your principles are much more noble than those people who simply vote Labour, Tories or anyone simply because their mum/dad did or they come from a particular 'class' or 'background' or because 'they always do'. It shows much more intelligence too. Your principles appear to be voting for the party most likely to good for the country rather than some outdated, pig-headed 'ideology'.

Well done for Lord Adonis for agreeing to do this, politics needs more of this sort of attitude along with Corbyn's more 'gentle' politics. Although I disagree with most of his policies I like his attitude.

 

[Camden]

The wording of the statement in your posting that I have emboldened above and the other one of "race to the bottom" that is so often used on this website appears to come from the hypothetical "Socialist Book of Political Phrases" with a somewhat frenetic wish to use such terms in order to prove left-wing credentials.

Don't see the connection. Left, right, whatever, when people vote for someone they should be able to know what they stand for and who they align with. I will "nail my colours to the mast" and say I believe in that principle of political clarity, I truly do.

 

[muddythefish]

The "race to the bottom" that is so often used on this website appears to come from the hypothetical "Socialist Book of Political Phrases" with a somewhat frenetic wish to use such terms in order to prove left-wing credentials.

Does your oft-stated view that you live in a posh part of Cheshire and your often sneering tone towards Labour supporters come from your frenetic wish to prove your right-wing credentials ?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The wording of the statement in your posting that I have emboldened above and the other one of "race to the bottom" that is so often used on this website appears to come from the hypothetical "Socialist Book of Political Phrases" with a somewhat frenetic wish to use such terms in order to prove left-wing credentials.

I have to say that if that is what you believe, then you have massively misunderstood a lot of people. 'Race to the bottom' is a term to describe situations when competition leads to a loss in some standards (often ethical standards, such as how you treat your employees). I've used it myself, and offhand of all the times when I can think of politicians or others having used the term, I can't think of any times that it has seemed inappropriate to me. It seems to me to be quite an apt term - and generally has nothing to do with proving your credentials.

Paul, it might surprise you to learn that those who express left-wing views are actually, for the most part, simply doing their honest best to offer solutions to the problems they perceive in the world (just like most of those who express right-wing views).

 

[coppercapped]

And how exactly is the city landed with a fiscal deficit meant to deliver a competitive offer, versus the government backed favourite that's been given all the spoils? Oh yes, one or two cities in particular will do very nicely from all this. Others will see decades of hard graft and regeneration ripped up in front of their faces and have their economic growth prospects crippled as competing locations take pole position. It's a spiral of economic despair for those locations.

Britain isn't Germany, by a long shot, not least of all in that Britain has a government which takes clear favourites. I suggest you also read the Wiki page about the tax you mentioned. It is criticised exactly for the reasons I mention - rich areas are able to lower their taxes and attract more business, poorer areas have to keep their taxes high no matter what, which drives business away. It's a recipe for someone making money, for sure, but not Britain.



I only mentioned the splitting up of the UK (well, what else do you call it when we no longer pay the same taxes into a shared pot and thus have one society but instead have areas aggressively competing against one another?), but it's funny you mention social disintegration too. Depending on how far they push it, you could well see that.

Catching up after some days away!

Firstly - about the Gewerbesteuer in Germany. Some background is, I think, necessary as the structure of local government is not the same as in the UK. The basic unit is the Gemeinde - I suppose the nearest equivalent would be a Parish Council, but on steroids. A possible translation in this context is ‘municipality’ but outside the large cities (Berlin and Hamburg each count as one Gemeinde) they include a lot of countryside, villages and small towns. There are more than 10,000 across the country and they are responsible for all those things in their areas which are not specifically reserved for the individual regional states, the Bundesländer. The Gemeinde are independent from the regional states, they manage themselves. The Gewerbesteuer, a local business tax on profits, is one of their few sources of income.

Although the Wikipedia article makes a theoretical point, in practice the effects are a lot less dire. A Gemeinde with a lot of countryside will generally have a lower tax rate than one in a more populated area - the advantages for a company to be in or near a city often outweigh the higher tax it has to pay and so does not significantly affect its choice of location. What the article does not mention is that because the Gewerbesteuer accrues to the Gemeinde, the Gemeinde has a vested interest in attracting business - so it has interest in designating areas of its patch for use as industry or business parks. Generally these are intended for expanding local businesses rather than attracting multi-nationals, so the type of industry is small scale - car repair firms, tyre suppliers, wood- and metal working companies, small supermarkets, local warehousing and distribution, speciality food processors and so on. The big advantage of all this is that some industry is retained in or near small towns and villages which helps reduce the de-population of the countryside and reduces the concentration of business in the large towns and cities so easing transport problems. The Gemeinde can build its own swimming pool, spa or village hall with the tax proceeds - and the presence of these facilities give fewer reasons for people to move away. A bigger criticism of the tax than that made in the Wiki article is that the tax is only payable by those with business premises - so the self-employed and sole traders working from home do not pay it which, as employment patterns change, means that more and more small businesses benefit without paying the tax.

I will be the first to agree that this model is not transferrable to the UK - at least not without a great deal of upheaval. What I cannot agree with, is your assertion that allowing local taxes to be varied is, de facto, bad because it leads to aggressive competition. The expression ‘United Kingdom’ means what it says on the tin - it is the name for the Kingdoms of England and Scotland united as one state. It has nothing to do with tax levels. And, anyway, why is competition bad?

Secondly - the ‘Northern Power House’. It is clear that the existing arrangements have not served areas outside the South East at all well since the loss of the coal, steel and textile industries in Wales, ’The North West’, ‘The North East’ and Scotland and the de-population of the countryside with the increasing mechanisation and automation of agriculture. I maintain that one of the most important tasks in national politics at the moment is to reduce the gap in incomes between different areas of the country - and this can only be achieved by the ’levelling up’ of the poorer areas.

One of the prerequisites for growth are good transport links - road, rail, air and telecommunications - both within the area and its links to the outside world. The Government has now, for all sorts of reasons, made a start in trying to give more emphasis to local input to transport planning in an area centred around the largest populations in the North West. And then promptly runs into criticism that its all a plot and that some areas will be disadvantaged.

On the one hand governments of all hues are castigated that too much power is centred in London - and when an attempt is made to devolve some responsibility - that is wrong too! Railing against the Government’s plans because it is perceived that some areas have already been selected as ‘winners’ and therefore the others will necessarily be ‘losers’ will help nobody. The ideas behind such criticism are just plain wrong - they are based on the old-fashioned, outmoded concept that the economic cake is fixed in size and A can only get richer if B gets poorer.

I have to declare my interest in these developments. In my time with a large US computer hardware company I spent a month or more each year in Silicon Valley - I have never seen so many Ferraris and Porsches in company car parks and I asked myself ‘why?’. Where are the UK equivalents of Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, Facebook, Google and Intel who employ hundreds of thousands…? This link <http://www.paulgraham.com/siliconvalley.html> is an interesting take on what is needed to re-create a Silicon Valley elsewhere. Could it happen in Hebden Bridge…?

But without better transport links, there will be no improvement. Grab the opportunity while you can - it can always be adapted later.

 

[Camden]

To be honest, I wasn't aware I had offered a left wing view at all:

I think there is a bit of a difference between selecting a party to vote for, and a politician nailing their colours to the mast so that people know what they actually stand for when selecting them.

If a candidate in an election has variously been a member of numerous parties, all opponents to each other, then in placing your cross by their name I think it's a reasonable thought that you may as well flip a many sided coin as to what you will actually wind up with.

Is that left wing? Or, more to the point, is acceptance of flip-flopping right wing?? If that's the case then logically at some point the right wing flip-flopper will at some point flop to left wing. Not sure if that was considered.

Catching up after some days away!

Firstly - about the Gewerbesteuer in Germany. Some background is, I think, necessary as the structure of local government is not the same as in the UK.

To be honest, I think that's about all you needed to say there. No it's not the same and not transferable. It's not relevant.

Some competition is OK, but not when some areas are drastically disadvantaged and unfavoured to the point where they are simply unable to compete against the favoured centres. There's nothing more powerful than government bias, and this government hands a lot of it out. This has been going on for a long time though, longer than just the current government, and while some locations are reaping the benefits of decades of being in the in crowd others are having misery piled on misery.

It's interesting that you talk about needing quality tech companies in the UK. One of my cities, Liverpool, has had a thriving games scene for some time, decades even. One of the world's finest tech communities responsible for some of the world's finest gaming titles. So fine that even when Sony decided to ditch it, the people stayed and just carried on creating output. Some of those people I gather will be making big headlines next month. Anyway. Question to you re this northern powerhouse and wanting to see wonderful and powerful global companies emerge: Why isn't the government all over this city, and pushing its games community to ever new heights and telling the country's game creating talent that the city is where it's at? Why instead would companies be encouraged to set up in Media City 30 odd miles away, an implant with absolutely no heritage in this arena whatsoever, and which would instead take jobs away from Liverpool and basically pour that organic homegrown advantage down the pan, boosting an already powerful city and weakening one that could do with a boost? In fact, throw it wider when was the last time you heard about anything good that is happening in Liverpool on the same scale as that which gets pushed for Manchester?

I think your view of what is going on in the "northern" powerhouse is a very "Reading" perspective. As someone who sees it close up day in day out, mostly from outside Greater Manchester, I can tell you it's not doing what you think it ought to be for the areas you think it ought to be. As the situation stands, Greater Manchester will probably be net neutral in terms of business rates, but have a healthy pot they can pool and spend. Liverpool will face a loss. They are lucky that this didn't happen 10 years ago, as according to figures being bandied around it would have been in excess of £100m a year, and that's just of the one central district.

If places get a fair crack of the whip and the UK behaves like a "UK" then fine, let's all do our best to shine. But that's obviously not the situation.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Don't see the connection. Left, right, whatever, when people vote for someone they should be able to know what they stand for and who they align with. I will "nail my colours to the mast" and say I believe in that principle of political clarity, I truly do.

You can hold your views but I never see the need to make such emotive statements as that particular one, which seems to come from similar events as portrayed in certain scenes of "Les Miserables".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Does your oft-stated view that you live in a posh part of Cheshire and your often sneering tone towards Labour supporters come from your frenetic wish to prove your right-wing credentials ?

Oh dear, have I touched a sore point...:roll: It seems quite acceptable for many forum members to adopt "the sneering tone" that you refer to when disparaging those who do not take their particular left-wing view, but cries of "unfair" ring out when the boot lies on the other foot. I have, unlike some, no perceived need to prove any of my many and numerous credentials, as unlike some, I have the personal confidence in them that has been gradually been formulated in my 70 years of life, which I hasten to add, is rather longer than many of our keen young Socialist brethren who subscribe to this forum.

I have stated the events that have occurred from my early days of life in north Manchester in the shadow of the New Allen Street viaduct in the late 1940's onwards on a number of occasions on this website and the events leading from that to where I now find myself in where I so reside. I do not intend to constantly repeat these.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

OK I'll come in again here. I'm quite left wing. And I also wish to see constructive debate, and I have little time for 'sneering' or other slurs whether it comes from the left or the right. I've argued with muddythefish on this area before now - and - frankly - Paul Sidorczuk and muddythefish - I'm getting quite irritated by the slurs that you are both throwing about (to my mind, you've both been acting just as badly as each other on this score).

Oh dear, have I touched a sore point...:roll: It seems quite acceptable for many forum members to adopt "the sneering tone" that you refer to when disparaging those who do not take their particular left-wing view, but cries of "unfair" ring out when the boot lies on the other foot.

This sounds a little like you're trying to argue that because you believe people on the left have 'sneered' against your views, that makes it OK for you to 'sneer' against left-wing views. Wouldn't it be more constructive to adopt the attitude that two wrongs do not make a right, and that you'll therefore respond to any sneers with constructive argument, rather than by retaliating in the same tone.

I have, unlike some, no perceived need to prove any of my many and numerous credentials, as unlike some, I have the personal confidence in them that has been gradually been formulated in my 70 years of life, which I hasten to add, is rather longer than many of our keen young Socialist brethren who subscribe to this forum.

Note the phrase that I've bolded. In response to that phrase, and the context in which you've written it: I am very happy that you have this confidence is yourself and that you have no need to 'prove your credentials'. That's a good place to be in. But what reason is there to doubt that the same is not true of most other people on this forum? What is to be gained by throwing out an implied accusation that those on the left are merely seeking to 'prove their credentials'? Can you really not see (a) how offensive that is, and (b) to what extent it's likely to simply alienate those whom you are trying to persuade of the truth of your views? Why not simply accept that the people you are debating against are, in all likelihood, giving their honest beliefs, and debate with them sensibly on that basis? (Obviously, the same message goes to those on the left who doubt the honesty or sincerity of those on the right).

 

[coppercapped]

To be honest, I wasn't aware I had offered a left wing view at all:

Is that left wing? Or, more to the point, is acceptance of flip-flopping right wing?? If that's the case then logically at some point the right wing flip-flopper will at some point flop to left wing. Not sure if that was considered.


To be honest, I think that's about all you needed to say there. No it's not the same and not transferable. It's not relevant.

Some competition is OK, but not when some areas are drastically disadvantaged and unfavoured to the point where they are simply unable to compete against the favoured centres. There's nothing more powerful than government bias, and this government hands a lot of it out. This has been going on for a long time though, longer than just the current government, and while some locations are reaping the benefits of decades of being in the in crowd others are having misery piled on misery.

It's interesting that you talk about needing quality tech companies in the UK. One of my cities, Liverpool, has had a thriving games scene for some time, decades even. One of the world's finest tech communities responsible for some of the world's finest gaming titles. So fine that even when Sony decided to ditch it, the people stayed and just carried on creating output. Some of those people I gather will be making big headlines next month. Anyway. Question to you re this northern powerhouse and wanting to see wonderful and powerful global companies emerge: Why isn't the government all over this city, and pushing its games community to ever new heights and telling the country's game creating talent that the city is where it's at? Why instead would companies be encouraged to set up in Media City 30 odd miles away, an implant with absolutely no heritage in this arena whatsoever, and which would instead take jobs away from Liverpool and basically pour that organic homegrown advantage down the pan, boosting an already powerful city and weakening one that could do with a boost? In fact, throw it wider when was the last time you heard about anything good that is happening in Liverpool on the same scale as that which gets pushed for Manchester?

I think your view of what is going on in the "northern" powerhouse is a very "Reading" perspective. As someone who sees it close up day in day out, mostly from outside Greater Manchester, I can tell you it's not doing what you think it ought to be for the areas you think it ought to be. As the situation stands, Greater Manchester will probably be net neutral in terms of business rates, but have a healthy pot they can pool and spend. Liverpool will face a loss. They are lucky that this didn't happen 10 years ago, as according to figures being bandied around it would have been in excess of £100m a year, and that's just of the one central district.

If places get a fair crack of the whip and the UK behaves like a "UK" then fine, let's all do our best to shine. But that's obviously not the situation.

My point about the Gewerbesteuer is relevant as the claim was that not paying the same taxes into the same pot would lead not only to the break-up of society but could also lead to the break-up of the UK. My point about the Gewerbesteuer is that although it is a tax which can vary from place to place it has not led to the break up of either society or state in a northern European economy which is similar to our own. The same will be true of variable business taxes here.

The point I am trying to make about the 'Northern Powerhouse' is precisely that government should not favour national champions or favour one area over another in investment in industry or try to persuade companies to move to an area selected by it. All experience shows this to have been disastrous - starting with the Brabazon and the Princess Flying Boat or building the Hillman Imp in Scotland when the company was based in Coventry. It should never even consider trying to persuade the gamers in Liverpool to move to Media City. That will be the death of the nascent business. It doesn’t need to, and should not try, to persuade other gamers to move to Liverpool - the relevant nerds know about Liverpool already.

There was a conglomeration of weather forecasters in the Bracknell and Reading areas - the Met Office in Bracknell, the European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting at Shinfield and the Meteorology Department of Reading University which together employed a significant number of people who could model weather systems. The skills and knowledge needed for such work can be used in other fields in which chaotic - in the mathematical sense - conditions apply. Then the Government decided that it would be cheaper to move the Met Office to Exeter and sell the Bracknell site rather then re-housing the Met Office staff (the building needed significant repair) just at the time that it seemed that some spin-offs would be established. As a result nothing happened.

What I am suggesting is that Government sets the conditions for growth - it should invest in transport and telecommunications infrastructure. It should encourage towns and cities to make the best of the areas and buildings they already have - form pleasant walks along the banks of rivers and canals, create areas in towns and cities where people like to go and loiter. Encourage specialised food shops and farmers’ markets. Fund university research sufficiently to attract world-class talent. The California Institute of Technology once had three Nobel Laureates in the same corridor - and some people still wonder why so much high tech is in California. Allow people to get rich from their endeavours - as these are the Venture Capitalists of the future and they have a much better idea of what products and services will be needed in the future than any civil servant.

So, devolve decisions on transport infrastructure - roads, rail and air - to the locals, but fund it properly. Central Government should then stay out of it and wait.

 

[Camden]

Your idea of what Central Government should do I agree with. If you were running for election, I would vote for your manifesto.

But my point is that you are not running the show, and what you think should happen is manifestly different from what actually is happening.

It is not simply the establishment of variable business rates and business rates retention that stands to turn one area against each other, although that's risky enough. Were the situation simply as you describe, yes perhaps the effect might be minimal. However it's not as you describe, it's the whole approach and everything else that has gone along with that and will go along with it in future. The divisive favouritism that has been at work for decades, but really accelerated and not bothered to even try to disguise it under this government.

The business rates issue is the latest in a long line of divisive issues, but given its potential effects (amplified by all that has gone on before) it could well be the straw that finally breaks the camel's back, and may get some real backlash when the cuts and viscous circles start to bite.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This sounds a little like you're trying to argue that because you believe people on the left have 'sneered' against your views, that makes it OK for you to 'sneer' against left-wing views. Wouldn't it be more constructive to adopt the attitude that two wrongs do not make a right, and that you'll therefore respond to any sneers with constructive argument, rather than by retaliating in the same tone.

Believe me when I say that I see you as a calming influence on troubled waters and I admit to being somewhat vociferous of late in certain of my posting responses. I see the Gospel according to Matthew has certain undertones in the well written posting that you have made:-
Matthew 5 : 5
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
Matthew 5 : 39
But I say to you, not to resist evil, but if one should strike you on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other

Perhaps a Damascene moment may come over me in my sleep tonight and tomorrow, the mild-mannered forum member you normally know me by will return to the fray and I shall keep my council better guarded in times to come.

 

[HH]

Perhaps you've reached that time of life where you have turned into a "grumpy old man".

 

[bnm]

The cut and thrust of debate I can take. I like to read opposing views, it helps me form my own opinion.

But Bible quotes?!??

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Perhaps you've reached that time of life where you have turned into a "grumpy old man".

Indeed, I am now often heard to say,...."I'm 70, you know"...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The cut and thrust of debate I can take. I like to read opposing views, it helps me form my own opinion.

But Bible quotes?!??

Will one of my beatitudes be of help to you....
"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
For they shall be satisfied".....

 

[bnm]

Will one of my beatitudes be of help to you....
"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
For they shall be satisfied".....

I have no god, I have no religion. Me 1 : 1

 

[TUC]

A man of few principles. He's been a LibDem councillor, Labour minister and now he's working for the Conservatives.

It's possible to have many principles and move parties. I've been a member of the Liberal Democrats, New Labour and now the Conservatives. My values haven't changed. It's the parties that have changed around me.

 

[67018]

"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
For they shall be satisfied".....

Is this a reference to promised Pacer replacement!? Don't suppose the Bible mentions any dates...