Labour MP candidate kills political Career

VeNT · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:22

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8363702.stm

so you've an opinion on the queen.
maybe she is a parasite etc but if you're an MP, emailing the opposition with this kinda thing is NOT going to help you.

do you ever wonder why the hell these people are doing with any kind of power?

arknor · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:25

shes no better than a benefit cheat imo.

+1 for actually saying what he thinks rather than pretending to do/say what he thinks the general population wants to hear

"Maybe if she wants Buckingham Palace to be maintained from public funds she should open it to the public."

sounds like he has a perfectly good brain in his head unlike the majority of politicians

Mr.E. · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:26

He's not an MP, he wants to be a councillor - slightly different.

antijoke · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:27

But what of the revenue she brings in from all the tourists coming to the country? :rolleyes:

Edward01 · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:29

anticonscience said:
But what of the revenue she brings in from all the tourists coming to the country?

The 30m a year we give her compared to the 200m+ she brings in tourism??

Missing.String · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:30

anticonscience said:
But what of the revenue she brings in from all the tourists coming to the country?

If that's such a great attraction then we really are as boring as everyone says.

Skull · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:32

If a politician did that here in Thailand they would be in jail for 15 years, destroy any chance of almost any future career and become a social pariah. :-O

Roland0 · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:32

anticonscience said:
But what of the revenue she brings in from all the tourists coming to the country?

I'm fairly sure that most tourists don't actually meet the queen, and are there to visit landmarks and famous buildings. I cant imagine that and American (or any other nationality) tourist is going to be disgusted when the find out, Louis XVI isn't in the Bastille.

Thats a very poor argument to justify the monarchy.

arknor · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:34

anticonscience said:
But what of the revenue she brings in from all the tourists coming to the country?

and what of the revenue we would get for opening up all of the palaces to tourists?

Hairybudda · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:34

The tourism excuse always gets touted in these things, I've never actually ever seen the numbers or how the data is collected, does anyone have any reputable links? I pretty much agree with the councellor.

Roland0 · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:35

Edward01 said:
The 30m a year we give her compared to the 200m+ she brings in tourism??

Ridiculous statement, how much income does France get from tourism?

grudas · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:39

good on him! someone said what they think..

Naffa · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:41

Wow, I near enough fully agree with Peter White's comments.

Surely this is the kind of thing that people should be happy about hearing? People telling the truth about how they feel and of their opinions, standing up for what they genuinely believe in as opposed to just pandering to the voters. It's an extremely rare happening in the world of politics.

Dolph · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:43

Cue those who haven't seen the figures complaining and failing to understand that the royal family, as a whole, provides more income to the UK than it takes out.

The civil list costs £40m, the crown estate brings in £190m a year for the treasury. (The revenue from the crown estate was given to the state in exchange for the civil list payment in 1760, with the caveat of fairness that if the civil list ended, the property rights would return to the ruling monarch), and has been renewed by every monarch since.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_list#United_Kingdom

So in other words, the current set up provides a net gain to the treasury of £150m, this is without tourism or anything else.

So unless you advocate stealing property from people (in which case I'd suggest your house and posessions are taken from you first), the current setup is by far the best.

The Labour MP is a moron as well, would we really want our head of state to have been Major, Blair or Brown?

Dolph · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:45

naffa said:
Wow, I near enough fully agree with Peter White's comments.

Surely this is the kind of thing that people should be happy about hearing? People telling the truth about how they feel and of their opinions, standing up for what they genuinely believe in as opposed to just pandering to the voters. It's an extremely rare happening in the world of politics.

Given that politicians have to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen, his outburst shows that he is completely unsuitable to the role unless he is going to lie under oath...

Jokester · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:50

I'm a Scottish nationalist and even I can see the positive benefits that the Monarchy brings to the UK as a whole.

The royals are high profile diplomats for the UK and raise our profile around the world which has all sorts of benefits, plus Prince Phillip is worth his share for comedy value alone, far better value than Jonathan Ross!

antijoke · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:53

Prince Phillip is a legend. Only he could say some of the things he has said in the passed and get away with it.

El Gringo · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:55

I'm a Royalist. As diplomatic laisons they are invaluable. Economically they make lots of sense, and they are globally known figureheads for the Kingdom. I'm happy with it.

I do hope Harry takes after his grandfather though

cm1179 · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:19

yeh, calling the queen ''vermin'' is a real smart move

Stretch · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:23

I have no problem with a public holiday but lets (sic) have one that means something, rather than celebrating vermin

'Vermin, parasites', that's rich coming from a politician.

El Gringo said:
I'm a Royalist. As diplomatic laisons they are invaluable. Economically they make lots of sense, and they are globally known figureheads for the Kingdom. I'm happy with it.

Until the one we have at the moment dies and we're left with a buffoon.