I hear BBC journalists and presenters asking far too many loaded leading questions that force the interviewee to deny and contradict the implied allegation only for the journalist or presenter to interrupt, talk over the interviewee and make their own “point scoring” assertions. This is not at all edifying. I want to hear the interviewee not the journalist or presenter . Far better to give the interviewee enough rope to hang themselves and either condemn themselves out of their own mouth if they are culpable, or be allowed to make good points clearly if they have something worth saying. Trying to put the words the journalist or presenter wants heard in the interviewee’s mouth is an intensely irritating technique. It doesn’t matter which side of an argument you might be on (or think you favour or reject) the debate is reduced to a series of unconstructive interruptions, assertions and contradictions. Will someone please tell the BBC that its journalists and presenters need to ask open questions and let the audience make their own minds up about the answers.
+1 the state has got bloated and needs a good clear out
Post Brexit post CV-19 we are going to need a “produce local and buy local, but sell abroad” economy driven by entrepreneurs using all available technological innovations. The tax system needs rewriting to favour this approach and not penalise those entrepreneurs who can grow businesses and those experts who work as self-employed consultants
We have to escape the vassal status and operate as an independent nation. Being part of the EU political project is not the way forward for us - of course we can agree deals with others including the EU, but not deals that we do not control for ourselves
Leeds - and start building the high speed rail link south from Leeds to Manchester and north west from Leeds to Newcastle . Huddersfield would be good alternative location not far away, if only to get Harold Wilson turning in his grave.
@jamehar- what would a referendum question be?
“Leave or Remain?” with an optional “if Leave then Boris Deal or No Deal?” which could be answered whether or not the first question was answered and regardless of how it was answered
Bringing back the Withdrawal Bill is just inviting it to get passed into law with a referendum and a customs union and an anti “No Future Relationship Agreement” provision risking reversal of Brexit or wrecking negotiation of a reasonable FTA - it has to be an election now
So clearly time for a general election when the legislature break the rules with the support of an openly biased Speaker and strip executive power from the government, deny the electorate a general election, and the courts prevent the government from using its prerogative power to prorogue a rogue parliament performing a coup.
On another post on this site I saw the following statistics that explain why the people are frustrated with their MPs and need a general election to settle who has power to govern
406 constituencies voted to Leave, 242 voted to remain.
148 Labour constituencies voted to Leave, 84 voted to Remain
247 Tory constituencies voted to Leave, 80 voted to Remain.
9 regions voted to Leave, 3 voted to Remain.
160 MP’s voted to Leave, 486 voted to Remain.
But not with a “who stands where against whom” pact with the Brexit party, and agreement to cooperate, post election, on leaving the EU
Drag him before a court that will order him to comply with the law requiring him to apply for an extension (per a law passed by a “coup” hijacking Parliament to bypass the Government) or be jailed for contempt of court.