Politics Pile-on

[mickd1961]

Your opinion and respect that! More likely for someone to be killed at excess speed 60/70 in a 30 mile limit than someone marginally over the drinks limit. Of course if you don’t drink you would have a different view.

The same percentage fine whether a person earns 15 grand a year or 1 million a year hits the person in the pocket the same. That should be the whole point of the fine and the consequences of not doing it again.

It’s nothing to do with not drinking.

That’s like me saying you agree with being able to have a couple and drive because you’re a drinker.

ANY minor dulling of the senses due to a pint or a spliff is not acceptable in my opinion.

As for punishments, it shouldn’t even be a financial penalty other than a token amount.

It should be removal of licence.

Imagine how the roads would improve if you knew you were getting a months ban for 3 points or for ANY illicit drugs in your system.

[WBA123]

Braverman asked a civil servant to lie on her behalf either by actually admitting her guilt to him or by concealing it 123.

That civil servant was quoted as saying that the story about her being caught speeding was a “pack of lies”.

This woman is short on ethics and personal morality, she has previous for this type of behaviour.

I agree with you about Rachel Reeves and Sunak, sometimes the attacks on politicians are just pathetic.

Ah, I wasn't aware she asked them to lie for her. In that case then yes, a clear breach of the ministerial code. I can only agree with your summary of her character..

[WBA123]

Suella should be no different from the general public! Celebrities or the rich should not be protected. On a speeding awareness course nobody would have dared say anything as they would have immediately been thrown off. I also hate how some speeding offences are a percentage of a persons salary to a maximum of usually 2500. So why should a person on say 50 grand a year be clobbered on a high percentage and a celebrity earning let’s say 30 grand a week still pays no more than the maximum amount. The same percentage should apply whether you are on 50 grand a year or 50 grand a week!

The system favours the rich and privileged every time!

I actually disagree, I think the Home Secretary should be treated differently from the public.

Parliamentarians, and especially those inside the cabinet, should have a higher threshold of standards than the general public. But equally I think they should have the option to be anonymous in public situations, such as a speed awareness course.

[boingy]

They all live in glass houses and they all throw stones.

[Omegstrat6]

I actually disagree, I think the Home Secretary should be treated differently from the public.

Parliamentarians, and especially those inside the cabinet, should have a higher threshold of standards than the general public. But equally I think they should have the option to be anonymous in public situations, such as a speed awareness course.

I agree with you that those in higher public office should be held to higher standards but also think they shouldn't be given any special treatment when they fail. Attending a speed awareness course with members of Joe Public might ring some of them down a peg or two! Of course there may be issues around safety or security for celebs or politicians to take into account but surely a speed awareness course is low risk and Braverman could always bring here own security officer with her if she wanted.

As for the fines issue, whilst reaching the stage where the threat of losing
a licence is equal to all, regardless of wealth (unless you happen to have a chauffeur &#128512 the earliest stages are designed to stop and make you think. £80 or whatever is a lot of money to me and many others, but it isn't to some, who will view it differently so I believe that fines should e percentage based. It isn't about envy, it's about achieving the desired effectiveness of such fines as a deterrent.

[mickd1961]

I agree with you that those in higher public office should be held to higher standards but also think they shouldn't be given any special treatment when they fail. Attending a speed awareness course with members of Joe Public might ring some of them down a peg or two! Of course there may be issues around safety or security for celebs or politicians to take into account but surely a speed awareness course is low risk and Braverman could always bring here own security officer with her if she wanted.

As for the fines issue, whilst reaching the stage where the threat of losing
a licence is equal to all, regardless of wealth (unless you happen to have a chauffeur &#128512 the earliest stages are designed to stop and make you think. £80 or whatever is a lot of money to me and many others, but it isn't to some, who will view it differently so I believe that fines should e percentage based. It isn't about envy, it's about achieving the desired effectiveness of such fines as a deterrent.

I still say imposing short term bans for each 3 points for speeding etc would have a bigger effect on getting drivers to behave.

[tomkya]

I find politics today both childish and in the gutter sick of the gotcha mentality of many politicians and those reporting on it and the underhanded civil servants.
Too many trying to get one over on the other side instead of concentrating on the serious issues this country faces it's so bad I really don't think atm there is a party worth voting for at the General Election voting for a party because the others are worse is hardly a choice worth having.