Thousands left with no electricity as workers rushed to Cameron's house so he could watch TV

First topic message reminder :



PM Tips: David Cameron's in hot water
PA

As thousands of homes were left without power during the recent storms, engineers were diverted to fix a simple problem at David Cameron’s home.

Two workmen were part of a team battling to restore electricity to 11,000 houses in Oxfordshire after storms and floods left families ­shivering in the dark.

But they were suddenly diverted to the PM’s £2million family home after he lost his power while watching the Sound of Music on TV.

George Faulkner and Alan Paton told BBC Radio 4 they were “diverted to a house in ­Chipping Norton” – which was later confirmed by their company to be Mr Cameron’s home.

They arrived after a 17-mile diversion to find the ­blackout was nothing to do with the storms and power could be brought back simply by flicking the trip switch in his fusebox.     

Mr Cameron was among those who had criticised the “unacceptable” time it had taken for power companies to restore supplies over Christmas and New Year as vicious storms and floods battered Britain.

Now it has emerged the PM himself might have contributed to the delays because power workers were sent to fix a basic problem at his home near Chipping Norton.

A senior Labour source said: “This just shows how out of touch Cameron is. The idea that emergency workers were sent to his home to flick a switch so he could get his TV back while thousands were without power is appalling.” Earlier this month Mr Cameron told how his home was hit by a 95-minute blackout on New Year’s Day.

But now the two Scottish and Southern Energy Power Distribution engineers have disclosed they were carrying out emergency repairs in the Oxfordshire village of Kirtlington when they diverted to Chipping Norton where Mr Cameron lives.

Mr Paton said: “We could have been employed on better things but we got called out to a ­property where the trip had gone that they obviously hadn’t checked properly.

“They thought it was the storms and they phoned in and said they were off supply. So we went there for nothing really.” He said: “There were people out for days. Lots of people missed their turkeys.”

Mr Faulkner added: “It didn’t need much sorting out. If he had got his minders to check the trip switch it would have saved us the journey. There was nothing wrong with their mains.”

After the havoc caused by the storms, the PM claimed he understood the anger of families whose Christmas celebrations were ruined by power cuts, floods and leaks.

Speaking about his experience, Mr Cameron said: “We had wallpaper coming down and drips going into a bucket. The power went off just before the end of the Sound of Music.”

SSE denied the PM’s status was responsible for the speed of its response.

A spokesman said: “We would like to apologise to the 11,000 customers in the Oxfordshire area who experienced a power cut over the Christmas storm period.

“When a customer calls to report a problem, our staff will ask a series of questions. If there is any doubt as to the nature of the fault, we prefer to send our engineers to the property as it is always better to be safe than sorry.

“ The Prime Minister did not receive preferential treatment when we attended his property and this visit was not to the detriment of other customers who may have been without power.”

A No10 spokesman defended the decision to call out workers to Mr Cameron’s home. He said: “The power went down because there was a leaky roof. There was water around the fusebox. The engineers came to fix it, which they did.”

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/thousands-left-no-electricity-workers-3062578#ixzz2rSUGYe33
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

   Disgusting.

He'll be hearing a different sound of music, come the next GE, when the public kick him and the rest of the Tory fuckers out.

NemsAgain wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:A No10 spokesman defended the decision to call out workers to Mr Cameron’s home. He said: “The power went down because there was a leaky roof. There was water around the fusebox. The engineers came to fix it, which they did.”??


Anybody else spot the bullshit in this statement from No 10

Was his fusebox in the attic?

the fuse tripped because of water around the fuse box"....... And yet the engineer who attended said "it was just the trip switch, all I had to do was flick it on"
So if the fuse tripped because of water, why did it not continue to flip after the engineer "just switched it on

The Electricity SSE supplier is responsible for the power supply up to and including the meter. After that, it's the consumer's problem, and he/she normally  has to pay a 'hardworking electrician' to mend it.

when any electric board engineers are called to any premises and find water on and around a main cicuit breaker they would simply terminate the supply and attaché a do not use label
till repaired by an qualified electrician How can they say he wasn't given preferential treatment? When he so clearly was!

I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

Boooooom great point me lord!

Have a wonderful evening

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

speculation at best FM as there has been no reports of such in 13 years

It matters not M'Lud, here hatred of all things Tory will prevent them from seeing the obvious.

I might add I'm no fan of Cameron no least because he staked so much on gay marriage when there was so much else he should have put first.

Look how much good it did with scatman.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

His security detail could have whisked him off to chequers or something.

PhilDidge wrote:

grumpy old git wrote:Of course i have a poor view of you....because you cannot argue from a consistant basis...you keep changing the rules as you go along. as I said you changed your argumental basis 3 times, you humiliated yourself by showing the true extent of your viscious mean mindedness stating quite clearly that you would be GLAD that 70000 people lost their jobs, and derided the very real and often valuable work these folks do, again stating that they could get "real jobs" showing an attitude that clearly ties you to the same ilk as the ALF. having lost that you retreat into the "lack of need argument"....which is pointless and illusiory...as sphinx says there are no end to the things for which there is no real need...would you ban them too?

Great so you have a poor view of me because you become stuck in debates where you are left found weighed measured and left found wanting, no suprise there really
Again you back the view you are right about me because you have not won a debate by proving guns are a necessity in society, you then play badly on as you always do the guilt bit where people lose jobs, a failed counter if there ever was one and also rather redundant, but choose again to just debate about me, very happy with that chap

So again you have no case for guns being a necessity and even worse you now drag that debate here where you have no case on Cameron as if your view on another debate renders the fact I have shown you have no case here as wrong, based upon an absurd notion you are right on another thread.

The science gets funnier  by the minute

this from the man that exults at the loss of 70000 peoples livelyhood. the destruction of a huge slice of the rural economy and the destruction of 2 million hectares of highly valuable and ireplaceable high quality biodiversity. All for the sake of his personal prejudice, and who cannot justify even that with FACT. he has proven to be merely an ANTI with NO reason and no substance to the argument.

fact
legitimate shooters represent such a miniscule threat to society it doesnt even register
criminal acess to legitimate guns is almost non existant
removing legitimate guns would make no difference to criminal use

FACT

480,000 people shoot live quarry
Shooting supports the equivalent of 70,000 full-time jobs
Shooters spend £2 billion each year on goods and services
Shooting is worth £1.6 billion to the UK economy
Shooting is involved in the management of two-thirds of the rural land area
Two million hectares are actively managed for conservation as a result of shooting
Shoot providers spend £250 million a year on conservation
Shooters spend 2.7 million work days on conservation - the equivalent of 12,000 full-time jobs

any argument based on "no need" is spurious and indefensible since this kind of argument can be applied to many many things and just which things is subject purely to personal prejudices

cars
bikes on main roads
bike club races on roads
alcohol
fast food
the list could be extended all ways and into every corner of peoples lives....this is the way of the liberal however..control ...must have control...you WILL be assimilated you will comply.

It is noticeable that the liberal camp does, more so than any other political pursuasion encompas the ANTI (no matter WHAT that ANTI may be anti about)

PhilDidge wrote:Boooooom great point me lord!

Have a wonderful evening

Thanks, same to you.

I'm surprised the same thought didn't occur to "the senior Labour source" who was so keen to get in on the act with a bit of opportunistic mud-slinging. If he or she is that senior, they must surely have been aware of the security protocols which surround all royals and senior government and Opposition figures.

Just one example that I can cite from experience (because I lived there) was when the late MP for Barnsley, Roy Mason, retired from his post as Northern Ireland Secretary his house was still lit up and guarded like Fort Knox for years afterwards because of the risk of a terrorist reprisal attack on him.

If the then Yorkshire Electricity Board had been tardy in sorting out a fault at his house there would have been all hell to pay, with the Labour Party making the most noise. And I would have agreed with them wholeheartedly.

Catman wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

His security detail could have whisked him off to chequers or something.

And then the Daily Mirror and yourself would have been jumping up and down and screaming about public money being wasted on a helicopter, just so that Cameron could continue to watch TV, wouldn't you?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Catman wrote:

His security detail could have whisked him off to chequers or something.

And then the Daily Mirror and yourself would have been jumping up and down and screaming about public money being wasted on a helicopter, just so that Cameron could continue to watch TV, wouldn't you?

It would have been worth while, if it meant that Joe public, could have had their power supply restored sooner.

Korben Dallas wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

speculation at best FM as there has been no reports of such in 13 years

Of course it's speculation on my part, because I'm no more party to the PMs security arrangements than you are. But at least it's speculation based on sound common sense.

And in any case, perhaps the fact that there have been "no reports of such in 13 years" as you put it might well indicate that the precautions taken to ensure the security of Blair, Brown and Cameron, which must obviously have included the use of electrically-powered surveillance cameras and effective communications, have thus far been successful.

I would hazard a guess that there would be unbounded joy among some of you if a terrorist hit man did manage to get Cameron or a member of his family.

I like to think that I at least am decent enough not to wish that on any politician, including Blair and Brown, both of whom I hate with a passion.

Catman wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

And then the Daily Mirror and yourself would have been jumping up and down and screaming about public money being wasted on a helicopter, just so that Cameron could continue to watch TV, wouldn't you?

It would have been worth while, if it meant that Joe public, could have had their power supply restored sooner.

SSE denied the PM’s status was responsible for the speed of its response.

A spokesman said: “We would like to apologise to the 11,000 customers in the Oxfordshire area who experienced a power cut over the Christmas storm period.

“When a customer calls to report a problem, our staff will ask a series of questions. If there is any doubt as to the nature of the fault, we prefer to send our engineers to the property as it is always better to be safe than sorry.

“ The Prime Minister did not receive preferential treatment when we attended his property and this visit was not to the detriment of other customers who may have been without power.”

So the SSE spokesman is lying?

Sorry, but you've just had your sweeties snatched away on this particular matter.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
speculation at best FM as there has been no reports of such in 13 years

Of course it's speculation on my part, because I'm no more party to the PMs security arrangements than you are. But at least it's speculation based on sound common sense.

And in any case, perhaps the fact that there have been "no reports of such in 13 years" as you put it might well indicate that the precautions taken to ensure the security of Blair, Brown and Cameron, which must obviously have included the use of electrically-powered surveillance cameras and effective communications, have thus far been successful.

I would hazard a guess that there would be unbounded joy among some of you if a terrorist hit man did manage to get Cameron or a member of his family.

I like to think that I at least am decent enough not to wish that on any politician, including Blair and Brown, both of whom I hate with a passion.

So no evidence is
In its self evidence
Is what you're saying
I thought you were a reporter ?

I would hazard a guess and "might well indicate" and speculation is hardly fact is it

The points I have made regarding this are valid
when you loose a supply (we have all had this at one time or an other) you phone up the supplier they will tell you if its a local outage/the fault and hopefully when it will be back on they may even suggest if its not a local outage that you check the fuses

They will tell you if they send an engineer out and it's a fault on the client side, then you are liable to be charged
if there was water that caused the MCB to trip then flipping a switch was never going to work

a power surge obviously tripped the unit and Cameron is so out of touch with normal every day occurrence that he had no idea what to do and cooked up (him or someone for him) this ludicrous explanation to mitigate the fact he is a idiot


And i would never and have never wished anybody dead by terrorism or any other means and i am saddened that you threw that in my direction in your reply

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Catman wrote:

It would have been worth while, if it meant that Joe public, could have had their power supply restored sooner.

SSE denied the PM’s status was responsible for the speed of its response.

A spokesman said: “We would like to apologise to the 11,000 customers in the Oxfordshire area who experienced a power cut over the Christmas storm period.

“When a customer calls to report a problem, our staff will ask a series of questions. If there is any doubt as to the nature of the fault, we prefer to send our engineers to the property as it is always better to be safe than sorry.

“ The Prime Minister did not receive preferential treatment when we attended his property and this visit was not to the detriment of other customers who may have been without power.”

So the SSE spokesman is lying?

Sorry, but you've just had your sweeties snatched away on this particular matter.

Name david cameron
Bod on phone (funny )
name david cameron .....
account number ...........

hold please

muffeled sounds on phone

(bod on phone) prime minister David Cameron


YES prime minister David Cameron

Bod on phone

How can I help MR Cameron

my electricity gone

we will have some body right round right away

That`s what i guess

Korben Dallas wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

SSE denied the PM’s status was responsible for the speed of its response.

A spokesman said: “We would like to apologise to the 11,000 customers in the Oxfordshire area who experienced a power cut over the Christmas storm period.

“When a customer calls to report a problem, our staff will ask a series of questions. If there is any doubt as to the nature of the fault, we prefer to send our engineers to the property as it is always better to be safe than sorry.

“ The Prime Minister did not receive preferential treatment when we attended his property and this visit was not to the detriment of other customers who may have been without power.”

So the SSE spokesman is lying?

Sorry, but you've just had your sweeties snatched away on this particular matter.

Name david cameron
Bod on phone (funny )
name  david cameron .....
account number ...........

hold please

muffeled sounds on phone

(bod on phone) prime minister David Cameron


YES prime minister David Cameron

Bod on phone

How can I help MR Cameron

my electricity gone

we will have some body right round right away

That`s what i guess

lol.

....After being held in a queue for up to half an hour.

EDIT:

With repeated annoying music.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

"Im not a fan of "dave",,,,but,,,,," bleats M'lud a familiar sentence is often begun,,,,, by racists.

"dave" is nowt but an Eton wastrel, and a cunt!,,,that's all you had to say.

scrat wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

"Im not a fan of "dave",,,,but,,,,," bleats M'lud a familiar sentence is often begun,,,,, by racists.

"dave" is nowt but an Eton wastrel, and a cunt!,,,that's all you had to say.

dont beat about the bush scrat...just say what you think  ://?roflmao?/: 

....Your call is important to us, you are currently held in a queue, we currently have a high volume of customers.

Blah fucking blah...

  

scrat wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

"Im not a fan of "dave",,,,but,,,,," bleats M'lud a familiar sentence is often begun,,,,, by racists.

"dave" is nowt but an Eton wastrel, and a cunt!,,,that's all you had to say.

3 years goes by so quickly ...i remember when they where All fans of dave every last one of them feathers and all

Korben Dallas wrote:

scrat wrote:
"Im not a fan of "dave",,,,but,,,,," bleats M'lud a familiar sentence is often begun,,,,, by racists.

"dave" is nowt but an Eton wastrel, and a cunt!,,,that's all you had to say.

3 years goes by so quickly ...i remember when they where All fans of dave every last one of them feathers and all

Sad,,,,but true, still I'm sure deep down they've come to the same conclusion, you can't polish a turd, but you can sprinkle some glitter on it!

scrat wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
3 years goes by so quickly ...i remember when they where All fans of dave every last one of them feathers and all

Sad,,,,but true, still I'm sure deep down they've come to the same conclusion, you can't polish a turd, but you can sprinkle some glitter on it!

However the cap doffers on here would spend their life doing just that if their masters bid them do so.......

Hilarious so again the PM has done nothing wrong and as per usual the usual suspects are in a spin over nothing.

You really cannot make it up how desperate some of the left are to find anything to attack with, here the worst being it is now somehow wrong for a PM to assist with a power issue.

PMSL

scrat wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

"Im not a fan of "dave",,,,but,,,,," bleats M'lud a familiar sentence is often begun,,,,, by racists.

"dave" is nowt but an Eton wastrel, and a cunt!,,,that's all you had to say.

You've been reading my posts for long enough for even you to realise that I am not a fan of Cameron - and never have been.

Here we go with the old "racist" jibe - the last abusive resort of someone with nothing useful or sensible to say.

Why not chuck in "homophobe" and "Tory c*nt" as well and complete your hat-trick?

scrat wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
3 years goes by so quickly ...i remember when they where All fans of dave every last one of them feathers and all

Sad,,,,but true, still I'm sure deep down they've come to the same conclusion, you can't polish a turd, but you can sprinkle some glitter on it!

Not this one, even with the feathers. I seem to recall that my first post when he became leader of the Opposition was that the Tories had made a monumental mistake in not electing the state educated and IMO far more capable David Davies.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

scrat wrote:
"Im not a fan of "dave",,,,but,,,,," bleats M'lud a familiar sentence is often begun,,,,, by racists.

"dave" is nowt but an Eton wastrel, and a cunt!,,,that's all you had to say.

You've been reading my posts for long enough for even you to realise that I am not a fan of Cameron - and never have been.

Here we go with the old "racist" jibe - the last abusive resort of someone with nothing useful or sensible to say.

Why not chuck in "homophobe" and "Tory c*nt" as well and complete your hat-trick?

Exactly. As I've said earlier here, the left seem to believe that anyone who doesn't vote Labour's a racist! Don't they realize that the more they spout that bloody word the more meaningless it becomes.

Korben Dallas wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Of course it's speculation on my part, because I'm no more party to the PMs security arrangements than you are. But at least it's speculation based on sound common sense.

And in any case, perhaps the fact that there have been "no reports of such in 13 years" as you put it might well indicate that the precautions taken to ensure the security of Blair, Brown and Cameron, which must obviously have included the use of electrically-powered surveillance cameras and effective communications, have thus far been successful.

I would hazard a guess that there would be unbounded joy among some of you if a terrorist hit man did manage to get Cameron or a member of his family.

I like to think that I at least am decent enough not to wish that on any politician, including Blair and Brown, both of whom I hate with a passion.

So no evidence is
In its self evidence
Is what you're saying
I thought you were a reporter ?

I would hazard a guess and "might well indicate" and speculation is hardly fact is it

The points I have made regarding this are valid
when you loose a supply (we have all had this at one time or an other) you phone up the supplier they will tell you if its a local outage/the fault and hopefully when it will be back on they may even suggest if its not a local outage that you check the fuses

They will tell you if they send an engineer out and it's a fault on the client side, then you are liable to be charged
if there was water that caused the MCB to trip then flipping a switch was never going to work

a power surge obviously tripped the unit and Cameron is so out of touch with normal every day occurrence that he had no idea what to do and cooked up (him or someone for him) this ludicrous explanation to mitigate the fact he is a idiot


And i would never and have never wished anybody dead by terrorism or any other means and i am saddened that you threw that in my direction in your reply

While I am happy to defer to your vastly superior knowledge of the technicalities of the electrical supply system and would not necessarily disagree with your no doubt qualified opinion that Cameron is an idiot, he is neverthless the Prime Minister and a known potential target for terrorist attack.

Those facts alone must make it obvious to anyone with as few as two working brain cells that there is bound to be security protocol covering priority maintenance of the electrical supply to any premises where he happens to be at the time - even if he had been stupid enough to stick his fingers in a plug and short out the whole of the house.

Would you not expect the same priority status to be afforded to a Labour PM? I know I would.

Tess. wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

You've been reading my posts for long enough for even you to realise that I am not a fan of Cameron - and never have been.

Here we go with the old "racist" jibe - the last abusive resort of someone with nothing useful or sensible to say.

Why not chuck in "homophobe" and "Tory c*nt" as well and complete your hat-trick?

Exactly.  As I've said earlier here, the left seem to believe that anyone who doesn't vote Labour's a racist!  Don't they realize that the more they spout that bloody word the more meaningless it becomes.

The only explanation that I can think of is that in some strange, perverted way they derive orgiastic pleasure from calling people who have the temerity to disagree with their views "racists", "homophobes" and "c*nts".

It's a sign of both immaturity and insecurity, I suppose.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
So no evidence is
In its self evidence
Is what you're saying
I thought you were a reporter ?

I would hazard a guess and "might well indicate" and speculation is hardly fact is it

The points I have made regarding this are valid
when you loose a supply (we have all had this at one time or an other) you phone up the supplier they will tell you if its a local outage/the fault and hopefully when it will be back on they may even suggest if its not a local outage that you check the fuses

They will tell you if they send an engineer out and it's a fault on the client side, then you are liable to be charged
if there was water that caused the MCB to trip then flipping a switch was never going to work

a power surge obviously tripped the unit and Cameron is so out of touch with normal every day occurrence that he had no idea what to do and cooked up (him or someone for him) this ludicrous explanation to mitigate the fact he is a idiot


And i would never and have never wished anybody dead by terrorism or any other means and i am saddened that you threw that in my direction in your reply

While I am happy to defer to your vastly superior knowledge of the technicalities of the electrical supply system and would not necessarily disagree with your no doubt qualified opinion that Cameron is an idiot, he is neverthless the Prime Minister and a known potential target for terrorist attack.

Those facts alone must make it obvious to anyone with as few as two working brain cells that there is bound to be security protocol covering priority maintenance of the electrical supply to any premises where he happens to be at the time - even if he had been stupid enough to stick his fingers in a plug and short out the whole of the house.

Would you not expect the same priority status to be afforded to a Labour PM? I know I would.

so your saying as PM he is entitled to preferential treatment ?
And i don't think that they are any security protocols covering priority maintenance of the electrical supply to any premises where he happens to be at the time as he tends to be a lot of places
in this case he was at his 2 million pound home (with a leaky roof)
He was not incommunicado by any means
And our politicians are not afforded the same level of security that say Obama enjoys, before he goes anywhere the secret service to extensive checks and upgrades if necessary

and since Dc has been Pm for 3 years one would have expected that any necessary enhancements would have been done
Such as cameras and alarms as you mention or a backup genny at the very least

And if such precautions can be circumvented by a power outage, then they are not worth the money in the first place and give a false sense of security
Also, he would have had minders

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

Not quite sure you would have such sympathy for Blair or Brown Ed?!  

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

You make a very good point Fred

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

scrat wrote:
Sad,,,,but true, still I'm sure deep down they've come to the same conclusion, you can't polish a turd, but you can sprinkle some glitter on it!

Not this one, even with the feathers. I seem to recall that my first post when he became leader of the Opposition was that the Tories had made a monumental mistake in not electing the state educated and IMO far more capable David Davies.

They did  :D 

What a shame they didn't apply themselves to doing a job in the way they apply themselves to perfecting their tourettes.

Joy Division wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:I'm not a fan of David Cameron, far from it, but has it occurred to anyone that a power failure at any property at which the PM of the day is either living or even only visiting could raise serious security issues? Security cameras out of action, vital communications disrupted, armed diplomatic protection officers unable to see properly what was going on...that sort of thing?

I would have been absolutely amazed if Blair's or Brown's presence in a property had not been dealt with equally speedily - and rightly so.

Not quite sure you would have such sympathy for Blair or Brown Ed?!  

I don't know about "sympathy", but I would have both understood and expected either of them to have received similarly preferential treatment - for the very reasons that I have already outlined.

Korben Dallas wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

While I am happy to defer to your vastly superior knowledge of the technicalities of the electrical supply system and would not necessarily disagree with your no doubt qualified opinion that Cameron is an idiot, he is neverthless the Prime Minister and a known potential target for terrorist attack.

Those facts alone must make it obvious to anyone with as few as two working brain cells that there is bound to be security protocol covering priority maintenance of the electrical supply to any premises where he happens to be at the time - even if he had been stupid enough to stick his fingers in a plug and short out the whole of the house.

Would you not expect the same priority status to be afforded to a Labour PM? I know I would.

so your saying as PM he is entitled to preferential treatment ?
And i don't think that they are any security protocols covering priority maintenance of the electrical supply to any premises where he happens to be at the time as he tends to be a lot of places
in this case he was at his 2 million pound home (with a leaky roof)
He was not incommunicado by any means
And our politicians are not afforded the same level of security that say Obama enjoys, before he goes anywhere the secret service to extensive checks and upgrades if necessary

and since Dc has been Pm for 3 years one would have expected that any necessary enhancements would have been done
Such as cameras and alarms as you mention or a backup genny at the very least  

And if such precautions can be circumvented by a power outage, then they are not worth the money in the first place and give a false sense of security
Also, he would have had minders

Yes, of course he is entitled, and I have explained exactly why I believe that it should be so.

I also gave you an example of a former Labour minister whose own security arrangements would have warranted similar preferential treatment during a widespead power outage. Again, that was quite right and proper.

In the past I have been involved in the planning of two royal and several VIP visits to farming-related premises and facilities, and that meant taking a subordinate role to security organisations such as Special Branch, the royal and diplomatic protection squads and even the military. And do you know what was among the first things they checked out in advance of the visit? The power supply and contingency arrangements in the case of emergencies.

The only reason for the predictable Left Wing huffing and puffing over this matter - and for the Daily Mirror's extensive coverage of it - is that Cameron is a hated Tory.

But whether you like it or not (I don't, but that's another matter) Cameron is Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and he and his family are potential targets for terrorists from both Great Britain and abroad. And that fact alone gives him a right to preferential treatment when it comes to the maintenance of a power supply to his home, office or even his garden shed if he happens to be in it at the time.

He didn't have an electricity outrage. He had one trip switch on a fuse box, that holds many trip switches, take out one section of power that stopped him watching the telly. All he had to do was put the switch back up. I very much doubt that security systems would be on the same board as the general household electricity supply.

Christ on a bike...even I have my house on a UPS and back up genny

if power fails everything important is automatically switched to a 2 kVA ups, after 10 mins, if the power is STILL off the whole house is switched to a 6kVA generator which has self started on loss of mains power...simple system(the neighbours then go green).

we than have lights computers telly and all the associated heating needed for our tropical fish and other exotics. fridge freezer, central heating and either kettle or microwave....cooking is on gas so......

and we have 48 hours of fuel reserve......

grumpy old git wrote:Christ on a bike...even I have my house on a UPS and back up genny

if power fails everything important is automatically switched to a 2 kVA ups, after 10 mins, if the power is STILL off the whole house is switched to a 6kVA generator which has self started on loss of mains power...simple system(the neighbours then go green).

we than have lights computers telly and all the associated heating needed for our tropical fish and other exotics. fridge freezer, central heating and either kettle or microwave....cooking is on gas so......

Exactly. Security would be on a different circuit, not the domestic one. And only one trip switch went, which would take the power out for one particular area. The security system wouldn't be a security system if it didn't have a back up system.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Korben Dallas wrote:
so your saying as PM he is entitled to preferential treatment ?
And i don't think that they are any security protocols covering priority maintenance of the electrical supply to any premises where he happens to be at the time as he tends to be a lot of places
in this case he was at his 2 million pound home (with a leaky roof)
He was not incommunicado by any means
And our politicians are not afforded the same level of security that say Obama enjoys, before he goes anywhere the secret service to extensive checks and upgrades if necessary

and since Dc has been Pm for 3 years one would have expected that any necessary enhancements would have been done
Such as cameras and alarms as you mention or a backup genny at the very least  

And if such precautions can be circumvented by a power outage, then they are not worth the money in the first place and give a false sense of security
Also, he would have had minders

Yes, of  course he is entitled, and I have explained exactly why I believe that it should be so.

I also gave you an example of a former Labour minister whose own security arrangements would have warranted similar preferential treatment during a widespead power outage. Again, that was quite right and proper.

In the past I have been involved in the planning of two royal and several VIP visits to farming-related premises and facilities, and that meant taking a subordinate role to security organisations such as Special Branch, the royal and diplomatic protection squads and even the military. And do you know what was among the first things they checked out in advance of the visit? The power supply and contingency arrangements in the case of emergencies.

The only reason for the predictable Left Wing huffing and puffing over this matter - and for the Daily Mirror's extensive coverage of it - is that Cameron is a hated Tory.

But whether you like it or not (I don't, but that's another matter) Cameron is Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and he and his family are potential targets for terrorists from both Great Britain and abroad. And that fact alone gives him a right to preferential treatment when it comes to the maintenance of a power supply to his home, office or even his garden shed if he happens to be in it at the time.

Bang on the money again

PhilDidge wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Yes, of  course he is entitled, and I have explained exactly why I believe that it should be so.

I also gave you an example of a former Labour minister whose own security arrangements would have warranted similar preferential treatment during a widespead power outage. Again, that was quite right and proper.

In the past I have been involved in the planning of two royal and several VIP visits to farming-related premises and facilities, and that meant taking a subordinate role to security organisations such as Special Branch, the royal and diplomatic protection squads and even the military. And do you know what was among the first things they checked out in advance of the visit? The power supply and contingency arrangements in the case of emergencies.

The only reason for the predictable Left Wing huffing and puffing over this matter - and for the Daily Mirror's extensive coverage of it - is that Cameron is a hated Tory.

But whether you like it or not (I don't, but that's another matter) Cameron is Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and he and his family are potential targets for terrorists from both Great Britain and abroad. And that fact alone gives him a right to preferential treatment when it comes to the maintenance of a power supply to his home, office or even his garden shed if he happens to be in it at the time.

Bang on the money again

Total tripe because they would be on different circuit boards. And it was only a trip switch that went, which doesn't take out the whole house. And a leaky roof would not have touched it, because the fuse box has to be where it is reachable, or they don't pass the electricity test.

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Bang on the money again

Total tripe because they would be on different circuit boards.   And it was only a trip switch that went, which doesn't take out the whole house.   And a leaky roof would not have touched it, because the fuse box has to be where it is reachable, or they don't pass the electricity test.

How do you know? You f--king know it all. You were not there presumably Camerons protection team were and chose to call someone out.

The main RCD would trip if any of the sub circuits was shorting.

He's the Prime Minister had t been Brown the same would have happened, Go choose a new broom and go scare some kiddies you old crone.

Clarkson wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Total tripe because they would be on different circuit boards.   And it was only a trip switch that went, which doesn't take out the whole house.   And a leaky roof would not have touched it, because the fuse box has to be where it is reachable, or they don't pass the electricity test.

How do you know? You f--king know it all. You were not there presumably Camerons protection team were and chose to call someone out.

The main RCD would trip if any of the sub circuits was shorting.

He's the Prime Minister had t been Brown the same would have happened, Go choose a new broom and go scare some kiddies you old crone.

  

I would normally say cut the bashing out but that really was too funny to try,

Well, that kinda shows what a fucking hypocrite you are doesn't it.

Sassy wrote:Well, that kinda shows what a fucking hypocrite you are doesn't it.  

Charming, sorry it was very funny, so don't shoot the person who laughs at something very witty!

So many lefties with potty mouths

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:Well, that kinda shows what a fucking hypocrite you are doesn't it.  

Charming, sorry it was very funny, so don't shoot the person who laughs at something very witty!

So many lefties with potty mouths

There's only one reason you found it witty. And if you seriously think that was witty, you need educating.

you cant educate pork...sorry troll

I edit my expletives when I use them unlike your Scatman friend who uses hardcore ones in the thread titles.

You are very irritating. Now you are an electrician as well as a double math a level student.

Again how do you know what his fuse box is like are you a psychic electrician?

Let me answer for you, you don't know, you haven't got a clue.

But you will never admit I!!!!!

Benefits street is on Sassy your heroines are on.

My god, if you don't know that fuse boxes have to be accessible and you don't know they contain trip switches for different areas, you have no right to be a landlord frankly.

You limbering up Sass?

Warren Moon wrote:You limbering up Sass?

Hi Keith, nah, can't be bothered, takes too much energy.