Politics Pile-on

[WBA123]

I notice Suella is in trouble for breaking the ministerial code again. I don't agree with her politics at all, but what I would say is I think this one is a bit harsh, she got a speeding ticket and asked civil servants if she could avoid doing an in person class or showing her face on an online forum (if I have that correct). That's exactly what I would be doing if I was home secretary. Because there are probably people out there who would sadly react / abuse. Is this breaking the Ministerial Code? Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see how.

Rachel Reeves was pictured on a flight going to the US sitting in a premium class seat. What's wrong with that? Its a long flight and she would prefer to be well rested for when she arrives. She'll be talking to prominent business leaders and politicians when she gets there and she'll likely be our next chancellor.

Rishi got criticised for flying to the north of the country a few weeks ago. I mean would we rather our PM prioritises his time so he has more time in other areas, rather than sitting on a train all day?

Criticism where it is deserved is fine and justified. I just see the above examples as where the opposition see an opportunity to criticise and jump on it. This is aimed across the spectrum, not on one particular party.

[mickd1961]

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.

[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..

[baggieal]

I notice Suella is in trouble for breaking the ministerial code again. I don't agree with her politics at all, but what I would say is I think this one is a bit harsh, she got a speeding ticket and asked civil servants if she could avoid doing an in person class or showing her face on an online forum (if I have that correct). That's exactly what I would be doing if I was home secretary. Because there are probably people out there who would sadly react / abuse. Is this breaking the Ministerial Code? Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see how.

Rachel Reeves was pictured on a flight going to the US sitting in a premium class seat. What's wrong with that? Its a long flight and she would prefer to be well rested for when she arrives. She'll be talking to prominent business leaders and politicians when she gets there and she'll likely be our next chancellor.

Rishi got criticised for flying to the north of the country a few weeks ago. I mean would we rather our PM prioritises his time so he has more time in other areas, rather than sitting on a train all day?

Criticism where it is deserved is fine and justified. I just see the above examples as where the opposition see an opportunity to criticise and jump on it. This is aimed across the spectrum, not on one particular party.

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!

[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.

[DaveP67 is back!]

I have just completed one, you are not allowed to mention any person on the course with you, if you do there are consequences.

[mickd1961]

I’m not a big fan of fining people based on income.

It’s like saying that because you’re more wealthy you get 40 years in prison for murder but only 20 years if you’re poor.

A sentence should always be the same for all and a punishment.

The better option is to increase the amount of points per speeding or driving offence and maybe reduce the length of the ban.

Three speeding offences sees you banned for three months but driving with drugs to be upped from a year to 5 years and the same for drink driving.

Shorter but sharper punishments for speeding would focus the mind a bit more .

I’ve twice had 6 points on my licence in a very short time and that doesn’t half make you much more careful when you know you can only afford one more slip up in the next 4 years.

[mickd1961]

I have just completed one, you are not allowed to mention any person on the course with you, if you do there are consequences.

I got very short shrift from the course manager when I said to her….”nice to see you again!”

[baggieal]

I’m not a big fan of fining people based on income.

It’s like saying that because you’re more wealthy you get 40 years in prison for murder but only 20 years if you’re poor.

A sentence should always be the same for all and a punishment.

The better option is to increase the amount of points per speeding or driving offence and maybe reduce the length of the ban.

Three speeding offences sees you banned for three months but driving with drugs to be upped from a year to 5 years and the same for drink driving.

Shorter but sharper punishments for speeding would focus the mind a bit more .

I’ve twice had 6 points on my licence in a very short time and that doesn’t half make you much more careful when you know you can only afford one more slip up in the next 4 years.

You have completely missed the point! Why for some driving offences is the fine a percentage of an individuals salary up to a maximum of 2500 pounds. So someone on a 50 grand salary would pay a high percentage of the 2500 but someone on 50 grand a week would pay peanuts.

The fairest way would be no maximum and the percentage of the fine would be the same for a person on 15 grand a year or 2 million. A percentage is a percentage so nobody could complain then it’s unfair. Other countries actually do this!

[baggieal]

I’m not a big fan of fining people based on income.

It’s like saying that because you’re more wealthy you get 40 years in prison for murder but only 20 years if you’re poor.

A sentence should always be the same for all and a punishment.

The better option is to increase the amount of points per speeding or driving offence and maybe reduce the length of the ban.

Three speeding offences sees you banned for three months but driving with drugs to be upped from a year to 5 years and the same for drink driving.

Shorter but sharper punishments for speeding would focus the mind a bit more .

I’ve twice had 6 points on my licence in a very short time and that doesn’t half make you much more careful when you know you can only afford one more slip up in the next 4 years.

Disagree Mick as every circumstance is different. For me it’s far worse if a young driver is bombing up a 30 limit residential road at 60 or 70 than someone who lets says is half a pint over the limit. In this circumstance if someone is speeding way in excess of the limit this should be an automatic ban and classed as a criminal offence the same as someone who is marginally over the drink driving limit!