Reply to: Time for the UK to have a new capital?

[rl4engc]

Harry And William can learn to use a cement mixer, mortar joints, fix slates and generally do some graft round the house rather than pretend 10 years doing fook all with a uniform on is a career.

Harry: 10 years in the army, including shooting Taliban in the face with an Apache Gunship.
William: Just started with the Air Ambulance, and donates his salary to charity.

You can say what you want about Royals in general, but bashing these two for being lazy doesn't really form a defensible argument.

[SimonMac]

The UK has two capitals, U and K

[BrilloPad]

Move Parliament to Wigan! (And seven other way to share out London

[BrilloPad]

I'm sure there is a remote island somewhere where both could be relocated. PUt them all on a leaky raft and leave them there. Let the rest of us just get on with things without the political crap.

Scotland? And perhaps we could nuke it too.

[TestMangler]

I have no issue with parliament having 6 billion spent on it getting repaired, Westminster should quite rightly always be regarded as the cradle of modern democracy.

I am not anti royalist but the Queen can go and fook herself, Harry And William can learn to use a cement mixer, mortar joints, fix slates and generally do some graft round the house rather than pretend 10 years doing fook all with a uniform on is a career.

You can't beat that for joined up thinking......

[minestrone]

I have no issue with parliament having 6 billion spent on it getting repaired, Westminster should quite rightly always be regarded as the cradle of modern democracy.

I am not anti royalist but the Queen can go and fook herself, Harry And William can learn to use a cement mixer, mortar joints, fix slates and generally do some graft round the house rather than pretend 10 years doing fook all with a uniform on is a career.

[lilelvis2000]

I'm sure there is a remote island somewhere where both could be relocated. PUt them all on a leaky raft and leave them there. Let the rest of us just get on with things without the political crap.

[minestrone]

OK, I stand corrected. They got 50% of the votes cast in Scotland, rather than 51%.

They did not get a majority.

[TestMangler]

The SNP did not get over 50% of the votes.

OK, I stand corrected. They got 50% of the votes cast in Scotland, rather than 51%.

[minestrone]

They got 51% of the votes in Scotland you tit. They don't stand in England. The tories have a majority government with less than 40% of the vote.

The SNP did not get over 50% of the votes.

[vetran]

Not round here they don't. Here near Witney they have a majority government with 60% of the vote and won 100% of the seats they entered. (Actually I'm surprised it wasn't more than 60%. Cameron must be slipping.)

when did Witney decide to stay in the UK is the important question? Do they still moan about bottling it?

[VectraMan]

They got 51% of the votes in Scotland you tit. They don't stand in England. The tories have a majority government with less than 40% of the vote.

Not round here they don't. Here near Witney they have a majority government with 60% of the vote and won 100% of the seats they entered. (Actually I'm surprised it wasn't more than 60%. Cameron must be slipping.)

[SimonMac]

What if Labour or the Tories said the won 96% of the seats they stood in ?

The point I'm making is they did not get seats by 'some trick of the electoral system' they got them by winning more votes than their opposition in 96% of the seats they stood in. That is, strangely enough, how you win seats.

I never said it was a trick (that was BP), I was questioning the 96% claim, and said they should behave like grown ups not little brats spoiling for a fight against the establishment.

How many Tory or Labour candidates stood in constituencies they had zero chance of winning but still paid their fee because they are a national party, how my SNP candidates could say the same, sometimes it's not the fights you win, in the fights you are just simply in.

[TestMangler]

What would happen in Labour said they won "96% of the seats in the north" or Tories won "96% of seats in the South East", absolutly nothing as it was a national election, so the SNP won "15% of seats" and as such have to realise they are part of the UK Parliment, and should behave like they are, or do what SF do an abstain from taking their seats if they don't beileve in what it stands for.

What if Labour or the Tories said the won 96% of the seats they stood in ?

The point I'm making is they did not get seats by 'some trick of the electoral system' they got them by winning more votes than their opposition in 96% of the seats they stood in. That is, strangely enough, how you win seats.

[SimonMac]

Of course they are, but in a 'region' with 59 seats up for grabs, which they won 56 of.

What would happen in Labour said they won "96% of the seats in the north" or Tories won "96% of seats in the South East", absolutly nothing as it was a national election, so the SNP won "15% of seats" and as such have to realise they are part of the UK Parliment, and should behave like they are, or do what SF do an abstain from taking their seats if they don't beileve in what it stands for.