The Queen's Speech

by Guest Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:59 pm

4th June 2014

What a wonderful spectacle!

Workers may get to keep more of their money - simple - don't give as much to the scroungers and foreigners!

David Cameron today drew the dividing lines for the next election, vowing that people should be allowed to keep more of the money that they earn.

Backing a Queen's Speech promising tax cuts, cheaper childcare and more generous pensions, the Prime Minister said the country could only afford cherished public services 'if we back business, support entrepreneurs and take on the anti-business sentiment that holds Britain back'.

Announcing the Coalition’s last year of law-making, the Queen said a key priority would be to ‘build an economy that rewards those who work hard’.

Mr Cameron contrasted his 'set of values' with Labour's commitment to a 'rag bag, pick-and-mix selection of statist Seventies ideas' which involved the government interfering in markets and driving up costs.

A slimmed-down slate of just 12 new bills include major pension reforms, tax-free childcare, help for small business and legal crackdowns on trafficking, criminal gangs and parents who starve their children of love.

But to the surprise of some, there was no new legislation on schools or the NHS and no mention of tackling immigration.

The Queen's Speech Articl13

by Tommy Monk Wed Jun 04, 2014 7:36 pm

One thing I noticed that I was a little concerned about was the talk of changing the highways agency from a quango to a separate govt owned company.

There is only one reason to do this, and that is to facilitate a future sell off of it!

by Fred Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:00 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

One thing I noticed that I was a little concerned about was the talk of changing the highways agency from a quango to a separate govt owned company.

There is only one reason to do this, and that is to facilitate a future sell off of it!

The Liberals will stop anything to do with immigration. They along with Labour thwarted the bill to give us a vote on Europe. If you want more immigration vote UKIP in Tory seats you'll get a Labour govt.

UKIP needs to box clever and fight in seats of pro Europe MPs if the British public is to get its say. Labour will destroy the economy, increase immigration to fill the voting booths, and take us further into a United States of Europe which will be deeply Red and undemocratic.

The economy has turned around here the Socialist in Europe have not turned theirs around indeed they have made matters worse in most cases.

by Tommy Monk Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:59 pm

Yes but what do you think about the highways agency...??

by Ben Reilly Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:55 pm

Why do they make that poor old lady wear that heavy thing on her head?

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 12:11 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:Why do they make that poor old lady wear that heavy thing on her head?

http://www.royal.gov.uk/HMTheQueen/HMTheQueen.aspx

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 1:42 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:Why do they make that poor old lady wear that heavy thing on her head?

I suppose you would sell it and divide the profits between everyone so all are equal

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 1:51 am

smelly_bandit wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:Why do they make that poor old lady wear that heavy thing on her head?

I suppose you would sell it and divide the profits between everyone so all are equal

Absolutely !!...and distribute the proceeds back to the poor who've been shafted from this Tory led coalition government , that lot are fucking stinking rich curteousy of the British tax payer anyway.

Scroungers.

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 1:53 am

Joy Division wrote:
smelly_bandit wrote:

I suppose you would sell it and divide the profits between everyone so all are equal

Absolutely !!...and distribute the proceeds back to the poor who've been shafted from this Tory led coalition government , that lot are fucking stinking rich curteousy of the British tax payer anyway.

Scroungers.

And they say Putin wants to being back the USSR!!!!!

I think he has some competition

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 1:54 am

And I suppose labour are all dirt poor for never having touched a penny belonging to the tax payer

Sure pal

by Ben Reilly Thu Jun 05, 2014 6:33 am

smelly_bandit wrote:And I suppose labour are all dirt poor for never having touched a penny belonging to the tax payer

Sure pal

You really think British benefits recipients receive anything from the government like the rich do?

Gotta link for you, I know you hate this but I'm only trying to help you:

http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/articles/163-resisting-austerity/12427-who-are-the-real-spongers

by Irn Bru Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:38 am

The nation owe's a a great deal of thanks to Australia for what happened during the ceremony yesterday.

An ardent Australian royalist has stumped up for the new state coach which the Queen will ride to Wednesday's state opening of Parliament. But it was intended as a present for her 80th birthday - eight years ago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/10873294/Queens-Speech-a-timeless-new-coach-only-eight-years-too-late.html

by gerber Thu Jun 05, 2014 9:45 am

Irn Bru wrote:The nation owe's a a great deal of thanks to Australia for what happened during the ceremony yesterday.

An ardent Australian royalist has stumped up for the new state coach which the Queen will ride to Wednesday's state opening of Parliament. But it was intended as a present for her 80th birthday - eight years ago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/10873294/Queens-Speech-a-timeless-new-coach-only-eight-years-too-late.html

Morfning Irn.

It is a fabulous gift and looked splendid yesterday. Glad he has been reimbursed for some of it at least.

by Eilzel Thu Jun 05, 2014 10:21 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

One thing I noticed that I was a little concerned about was the talk of changing the highways agency from a quango to a separate govt owned company.

There is only one reason to do this, and that is to facilitate a future sell off of it!

We have a RW Conservative government, if they do have ideas of selling does this really surprise you?

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 10:26 am

Joy Division wrote:
smelly_bandit wrote:

I suppose you would sell it and divide the profits between everyone so all are equal

Absolutely !!...and distribute the proceeds back to the poor who've been shafted from this Tory led coalition government , that lot are fucking stinking rich curteousy of the British tax payer anyway.

Scroungers.

I believe they were stinking rich before they milked the British tax payer.

Mwah hah hah hah

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 10:28 am

Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

One thing I noticed that I was a little concerned about was the talk of changing the highways agency from a quango to a separate govt owned company.

There is only one reason to do this, and that is to facilitate a future sell off of it!

We have a RW Conservative government, if they do have ideas of selling does this really surprise you?

RW???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

You should meet BigAndy9!

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:02 am

BigAndy9 wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

Absolutely !!...and distribute the proceeds back to the poor who've been shafted from this Tory led coalition government , that lot are fucking stinking rich curteousy of the British tax payer anyway.

Scroungers.

I believe they were stinking rich before they milked the British tax payer.

Mwah hah hah hah

The majority of them Inherited money Andy,,,quite different to our Muslim billionaire friends here who worked tirelessly and made so many personal sacrifices to earn their money.

Those folk can show people who it's done,

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:32 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
smelly_bandit wrote:And I suppose labour are all dirt poor for never having touched a penny belonging to the tax payer

Sure pal

You really think British benefits recipients receive anything from the government like the rich do?

Gotta link for you, I know you hate this but I'm only trying to help you:

http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/articles/163-resisting-austerity/12427-who-are-the-real-spongers

How's this??

I don't care about the bone idle lazy scrounging parasites

Fuck em

Why should I have to carry the free loading scum??

Milk the poor feed the rich I say

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:37 am

Joy Division wrote:
BigAndy9 wrote:

I believe they were stinking rich before they milked the British tax payer.

Mwah hah hah hah

The majority of them Inherited money Andy,,,quite different to our Muslim billionaire friends here who worked tirelessly and made so many personal sacrifices to earn their money.

Those folk can show people who it's done,

Obviously you're not talking about the Saudis

by Tommy Monk Thu Jun 05, 2014 2:22 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:
One thing I noticed that I was a little concerned about was the talk of changing the highways agency from a quango to a separate govt owned company.
There is only one reason to do this, and that is to facilitate a future sell off of it!
We have a RW Conservative government, if they do have ideas of selling does this really surprise you?

Like labour trying to sell off the royal mail you mean....?

And remind us about Serco and G4S.....?

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 2:28 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Eilzel wrote:
We have a RW Conservative government, if they do have ideas of selling does this really surprise you?

Like labour trying to sell off the royal mail you mean....?

And remind us about Serco and G4S.....?

Lefties are amazing creatures aren't they??

See no evil in themselves ever

by Guest Thu Jun 05, 2014 2:41 pm

The Queen's Speech 192703-cromlix-house-hotel-in-dunblance-owner-andy-murray-hotel-press-pic

Look at Scottish Tennis ace Andy Murray's hotel ... Isn't he doing just so well!! Smile

The first Wimbledon champion in 77 years has so much to smile about,especially with his huge wealthy too! Smile

And with a nice girlfriend on his arm who makes Kate look like a frump.

by Eilzel Thu Jun 05, 2014 3:16 pm

I'm not Labour nitwits and never have been; why must you always mistake LW for meaning Labour...

by Tommy Monk Thu Jun 05, 2014 3:26 pm

Oh, right, I remember now...... you are a lib democrac and part of The govt who have brought in this quangos change....!!!

Twat!

by Eilzel Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:27 pm

Ouch tommy, twat, and the old exclamation mark for emphasis, I'm truly hurt haha!

by Tommy Monk Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:34 pm

So are you planning a sell off of The highways agency or not?

by Eilzel Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:45 pm

Hahaha if I had that kind of authority tommy I probably wouldn't be wasting my time with obscure weirdos on forums Smile

by Tommy Monk Thu Jun 05, 2014 5:50 pm

Don't talk about Didge like that... he will get all teary and have another melt down!

lol!

by Ben Reilly Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:09 pm

I know you didn't click the link, smelly, so let me just tell you that the bankers get WAY more money from the UK government than benefits recipients do.

by nicko Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:19 pm

How do you know this Benji?

by Ben Reilly Thu Jun 05, 2014 8:02 pm

nicko wrote:How do you know this Benji?

The information is at your fingertips:

Ignore the media misinformation: spending on out-of-work benefits isn’t out of control, nor is the welfare state responsible for growing poverty. It cannot be repeated often enough: most of the social security budget (53 per cent) is spent on pensioners. That compares with a little over a quarter (26 per cent) on those much-maligned out-of-work benefits. Spending on the latter, as a proportion of national income, has been pretty flat for almost three decades.

The number of working households living below the poverty line now outnumbers the number of workless households – 6.7 million compared with 6.3 million. A life on social security isn’t the chief driver of poverty; a life on low pay is. Rather than decry the level of benefits that the jobless and the disabled are entitled to, perhaps politicians and pundits should focus on how four out of every five new jobs created under this government have been in low-pay sectors such as retail, hospitality and residential care. One in five of the UK workforce now earns less than the living wage and requires in-work benefits just to make ends meet – that’s five million people in total.

So let us turn instead to the real scandal, the issue that dare not speak its name: corporate welfare. Where is the ministerial or media anger over the activities of G4S and Serco, which are accused of ripping off the taxpayer but which make millions from lavish government contracts? Where are the howls of outrage over taxpayer-funded payouts to the fossil-fuel industry? The Met Office’s chief scientist may believe “there is a link” between the recent floods and climate change but the government continues to subsidise the coal, oil and gas industries to the tune of £2.6bn a year.

Why are the rail company bosses not household names in the same way as White Dee or Smoggy from Benefits Street? The UK has the most expensive rail fares in Europe and yet, according to research by the University of Manchester, the train-operating companies are completely dependent on public subsidies. The university’s June 2013 report for the TUC, aptly entitled The Great Train Robbery, revealed that the top five recipients alone got almost £3bn in taxpayer support between 2007 and 2011. Meanwhile, Network Rail, which is in charge of the UK’s rail infrastructure, receives an annual public subsidy of £4bn (roughly four times greater than the comparable cost under the publicly owned British Rail in the early 1990s).

Dare I mention PFI? Wait, don’t yawn at the back. The Private Finance Initiative, where construction and maintenance of schools, hospitals, roads and the rest are contracted out to private firms, was invented by the Tories in 1992, ramped up by New Labour over 13 years and continues under the coalition. As of 2013, it was forecast that 725 PFI contracts for public facilities across the UK, with a total capital value of £54bn, will cost the Exchequer more than £300bn by the time they are paid off. How’s that for a “something for nothing” culture?

Then there are the bank bailouts, perhaps the biggest act of corporate welfare in living memory. You want benefit spongers? Head for the Square Mile. As of 2013, the total level of financial support provided to the banks by the state, in the form of guarantees and cash outlays, amounted to £141bn, according to the National Audit Office. At the height of the financial crisis, the figure was an astonishing £1.1trn – enough to cover the £5bn Jobseeker’s Allowance budget for the next 200 years. And yet, in spite of being propped up by the taxpayer, RBS and Lloyds are expected to pay out roughly £900m in combined bonuses for 2013. Do I hear the word “scroungers”?

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/forget-benefits-street-when-will-we-shame-scroungers-lapping-corporate-welfare

by Fred Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:55 pm

Joy Division wrote:
smelly_bandit wrote:

I suppose you would sell it and divide the profits between everyone so all are equal

Absolutely !!...and distribute the proceeds back to the poor who've been shafted from this Tory led coalition government , that lot are fucking stinking rich curteousy of the British tax payer anyway.

Scroungers.

Dick are you and Didge courting?

Is your great idea to confiscate money from the rich and share it out believing it will stayed shared?

What then would be the point of trying to get ahead? You would know it will be taken off you by envious thick Socialist.

You can't have enterprise and hard work if those who do nothing get as much.

The Soviets found that out very early on they chose to ignore it though. Look what happened they collapsed. You may have missed that in a drug fuelled moment. They had the excuse of ideology you are simply thick JD.

by Ben Reilly Fri Jun 06, 2014 12:01 am

Again: Jobseeker's Allowance, £5 billion.

Bankers: £1.1 trillion.

by Guest Fri Jun 06, 2014 12:04 am

Alright said Fred wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

Absolutely !!...and distribute the proceeds back to the poor who've been shafted from this Tory led coalition government , that lot are fucking stinking rich curteousy of the British tax payer anyway.

Scroungers.

Dick are you and Didge courting?

Is your great idea to confiscate money from the rich and share it out believing it will stayed shared?

What then would be the point of trying to get ahead? You would know it will be taken off you by envious thick Socialist.

You can't have enterprise and hard work if those who do nothing get as much.

The Soviets found that out very early on they chose to ignore it though. Look what happened they collapsed. You may have missed that in a drug fuelled moment. They had the excuse of ideology you are simply thick JD.

Drinky, what you stand for is....take away all workers rights, no unions allowed, allow companies to pay workers a pittance , afford the wealthy the best tax breaks, introduction of having to pay to see a doctor...shit like that.

Not to mention scummy things like the bedroom tax Drinky....your all for the ruthless employer and to fcuk with the poor emloyee and you probably sit and watch the bailif programmes on telly and cheer on the fcuking scum debt collectors man.

That is want your all about Drinky...fcuking the poor people over and spoon feeding the rich.

End of.

by Guest Fri Jun 06, 2014 12:06 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:Again: Jobseeker's Allowance, £5 billion.

Bankers: £1.1 trillion.

That's it Ben,,,they often choose to ignore overly greedy bankers who definitely played a huge part in fcuking the country over.

by Tommy Monk Fri Jun 06, 2014 12:59 am

It was labour who presided over the banking failure with their FSA toothless dog expensive quango, and it was labour who bailed them out when they fucked up too.

by Guest Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 am

Tommy Monk wrote:It was labour who presided over the banking failure with their FSA toothless dog expensive quango, and it was labour who bailed them out when they fucked up too.

Did Labour force banks to lend money to people who could not properly afford it without checking thoroughly enough, their incoming and outgoing finances?

No, blame those bankers for that Tommy.

by veya_victaous Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:14 am

Joy Division wrote:
BigAndy9 wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

Absolutely !!...and distribute the proceeds back to the poor who've been shafted from this Tory led coalition government , that lot are fucking stinking rich curteousy of the British tax payer anyway.

Scroungers.

I believe they were stinking rich before they milked the British tax payer.

Mwah hah hah hah

The majority of them Inherited money Andy,,,quite different to our Muslim billionaire friends here who worked tirelessly and made so many personal sacrifices to earn their money.

Those folk can show people who it's done,

Sorry JD that is wrong Most of the Muslim Millionaires are inherited money Neutral

Particularly those out of the middle east

by TC Fri Jun 06, 2014 2:27 am

Ramenez la guilotine!

by harrymuffin Fri Jun 06, 2014 10:49 am

Why have Camilla, Charles, and Phillip fallen into a coma?

by Guest Fri Jun 06, 2014 10:55 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Joy Division wrote:

The majority of them Inherited money Andy,,,quite different to our Muslim billionaire friends here who worked tirelessly and made so many personal sacrifices to earn their money.

Those folk can show people who it's done,

Sorry JD that is wrong Most of the Muslim Millionaires are inherited money
Particularly those out of the middle east

Hey Veya, I'm not sure of the figures and who made exactly what themselves or who inherited...I'm sure some did make their own money though, I was doing a BA by posting things which are not a fact. Laughing

by Sponsored content