Halifaxtiger

For me, that's the nub of the matter. While I would suggest that no convincing argument can be that other politicians would have been more competent, you most certainly can contend that they would have acted with more integrity.

As I said before, I am no Johnson fan but I don't think that's true. Even if it was, how much difference would 'marginally' have made ? At the risk of being insulting, it is deluded to believe that Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott would have handled matters more competently. No worse, to be fair, but no better. The Government was indeed ill prepared but I would question whether any other Government would have been in a more favourable position. Very unlikely, I'd say, and hindsight is most definitely a wonderful thing, isn't it ? Whether lockdown was correct or not it is a different argument, but Johnson - most of the time - followed the advice of the scientists at the time, and which politician would not ? Faced with the doomsday predictions that some were fully qualified to make, he had little choice. Indeed, when the lockdown in the autumn was delayed - with the likes of Carl Heneghan (whom Johnson consulted at the time) insisting that there was no second Covid wave - Johnson was severely criticised for that. It seems to me that he could not do right for doing wrong. To me, it is more about integrity than ability. I strongly suspect that your view regarding Conservative supporters doing very well out of Covid is accurate and therefore shameful. The comments attributed to Johnson, Sunak, Hancock and others are appalling. The gross disregard of Covid regulations by members of the government and the Conservative party was utterly repulsive. Those responsible deserve to be roundly condemned - and, if necessary, brought to justice - for that.

It certainly appears to me that Boris Johnson is coming across as 'disastrously unsuited' to deal with Covid and indeed some of the comments attributed to him are so callous as to be repulsive, but the question I would ask is which one of the set of politicians in parliament in early 2020 (and subsequently) might have done a better job ? I think they would all have been floundering about in a sea of ignorance and indecision, pulled one way or another by conflicting - and occasionally terrifying - advice. I can't - by any stretch of the imagination - be called a Johnson fan but it certainly appears to me that any of those who were in a position to be PM at the time would have been the same. I am wondering how Johnson might have had 'months to prepare' for something that was only identified in December 2019 and landed on these shores in February 2020. To my knowledge - and during my working career I made decisions following benefit fraud investigations - powers to examine bank accounts in fraud cases already exist. I can only presume that this new legislation makes the process to be able to do so more easy and simple so that accounts might be routinely examined. As long as that process is used for the purpose for which it is designed and is subject to robust audit practices to ensure that is the case, I personally have no difficulty with it. The suggestion that pensioners do not commit fraud was treated as a standing joke by fraud investigators and benefit practitioners whose experience was occasionally - if not often - to the contrary.

My favourite stately home is Brighton Pavilion. Its so vulgar and garish its almost a surreal nightmare, but there's nowhere else anything like it.

My point is that your view that any person who believes that the Labour party might have held a Brexit referendum is little more than a simpleton is flawed. From the Labour party's manifesto they were clearly against leaving the EU and, as I have said, it took place merely as a device to prevent the Conservative party tearing itself apart rather than for the good of the country. Having said that, Jeremy Corbyn received considerable criticism (much of it from his own party) for his apparently lukewarm support of the remain campaign. Indeed, some blamed him for the Leave vote. To suggest that Labour definitely would not have held a referendum at any point is, I would say, at the very least debatable. That is based upon the remarkable ground swell of support for Brexit (for right or wrong - I make no comment on the merits (or otherwise) of Brexit save to say I voted remain) as evidenced in the support expressed in elections for UKIP. The only reason that that support ended was because they got what they wanted, and what is inevitable is that they would have continued their attempts to obtain a referendum at least. Could the Labour party have resisted that indefinitely ? I'm not sure they could have in the light of just how popular Brexit was becoming. Indeed, given the final result (and I give the majority of British people a little more credit than you do - we aren't all hypnotised by the likes of the 'tax avoiding' Daily Mail, thank goodness) it could be said that to refuse to hold a referendum would be going against the will - subject to our democratic process - of the nation.

A run out to Sedbergh through the Yorkshire Dales yesterday. Halifax-Keighley-Silsden-Addingham-Bolton Abbey-Grassington-Buckden-Hawes-Sedbergh (B6160, then C class from Buckden to Hawes, A684 to Sedbergh, Home via Kirkby Lonsdale and Skipton. Weather wasn't brilliant but its a trip I never tire of making, especially when the River Wharfe is (slightly)in flood.

Brexit had 17 million supporters. That's how many voted for it in the referendum in a turn out of 72% (equivalent to virtually any General Election since the war). However unpalatable you (and many others) might find that, that's the truth of the matter. In any election its not the total number of electors that counts, but the number that actually vote. UKIP;s share of the vote in the 3 elections mentioned was 20%, 26% and 13%. By anyone's standards, that's a sizeable minority and discounting the results of any election as 'meaningless' would be something that only the most foolish of politicians would do. By suggesting that only 9% of the country supported UKIP on the basis of election results there is an assumption that the 15m who did not vote at all in 2015 would all be against Brexit. That's a trap that both the Leave and Remain campaigns fell into. I'd say Cameron chose to have a referendum because the Brexit issue was tearing the Conservative party apart, not because of what was best for Britain. He also thought he'd win (bookies did too) and put the issue to bed once and for all. I'd certainly accept that the Brexit campaign was marked by disinformation and lies as you suggest (although I believe that that was not the sole prerogative of the Leave party). In addition, there was ignorance, prejudice and xenophobia. Having said that (and with the possible exception of the latter) which General Election has not ?

Me included. In 2015 the Conservative Party manifesto explicitly stated that they would hold a referendum on EU membership. The Laboiur Party one did not - indeed, as Norbold has confirmed, they clearly indicated that they would remain in the EU. But whether they would have continued to hold that view indefinitely is very much another matter (it is of relevance that Keir Starmer has specifically ruled out a Brexit reversal). That is because of the strength of the UK Independence Party at the time who, lets face it, stood for one thing and one thing only. In the 2013 local elections, UKIP received just under 20% of votes cast, 6% more than the Liberal Democrats and just 1% less than Labour. In the 2014 European elections, they polled more votes than another party. In the 2015 General Election, they attracted more votes than the Liberal Democrats and the SNP combined. To me, it is surely a moot point that Laboiur would have continued to hold the position that they did in the face of the fact that a significant proportion of GB citizens were questioning (rightly or wrongly) Britain's place in the EU.

England 3 Tonga 0 and a whitewash of the team one place below in the world rankings. While England's performances - especially defensively - have been pretty good, none of the test matches might have been labelled a classic by any means as they were far too much of an arm wrestle. In addition the attendances have been below expectations (although international rugby league - except against the Australians - has never really pulled in big gates compared with the domestic game). In the final test, the game opened up a bit and there was a superb score when the ball was kept alive on the last tackle and a brilliant cross field kick by Wigan scrum half Harry Smith (deservedly named man of the series) was taken by Leeds centre Harry Newman to go over. Smith, Newman, St Helens prop Matty Lees, Warrington winger Matty Ashton and Hull KR half back Mikey Lewis all marked cards for the future, while established internationals like St Helens full back Jack Welsby and Warrington half back George Williams once again showed their class. I have never been a big fan of Wests Tigers second row John Bateman but two tackle off loads resulted in tries and his ability to take on Tonga players 3 or even 4 stone heavier was remarkable, and he was a clear choice for man of the match yesterday. Samoa are apparently touring next year, and the sooner the Aussies and Kiwis are back the better. In World RL terms I suspect the series win was pretty small beer compared with New Zealand inflicting Australia's biggest ever defeat in the Pacific Cup Final. One last thing: there are some rumours that Owen Farrell will switch codes to play for Wigan (to be fair, these rumours aren't new) as a replacement for Canberra Raiders bound Morgan Smithies. Should that happen, it will be interesting to see where he plays. With 2023 Man of Steel Bevan French and Test scrum half Harry Smith in the team, I can't see it being at half back.

I was on a speedway tour once and needed to answer a call of nature (the sit down kind) and stopped at Watford Gap. Sat down and getting on with it, a mobile phone rang and I realised it was in the trap next to me. The call was answered and : 'Yes, I am on my way'. 'About an hour or so' 'Watford Gap' 'Having a sh@t' 'What do you mean again?' 'I am not always on the bog, so f@@k off'. I remember trying desperately to control myself.............

To my knowledge, the BSPA can't touch Isle of Wight other than making it difficult for them to recruit riders for their meetings (which I believe they have done, despite protestations to the contrary). The BSPA's selfishness and incompetence certainly led to Isle of Wight withdrawing from the NDL and by all accounts they have done pretty well outside of it. Running meetings over a much shorter season and being able to make their own decisions - rather than petty, vindictive and stupid rulings from the BSPA - will certainly have helped. My suspicion is that Kent would have withdrawn from the NDL anyway due to Si Kellow's apparent personal difficulties but the BSPA's savage decision to suspend their licence and fine them last season might well have prompted that decision anyway. Its not totally unreasonable to suggest that BSPA actions have cost the NDL two teams, and that could easily be the difference between the league continuing and folding.

Mine too. I'm from Beddington Corner. I now live in West Yorkshire and, out for my daily walk a few weeks ago, heard an accent that was familiar and clearly not local. Turns out the chap was also from the St Helier estate - Peterborough Road - and we come from streets less than a mile apart. We then spent the next hour or so reminiscing about our youth in the area and the places we both knew well. On occasion, it is a very small world indeed. I went on the railway line from Sutton to Mitcham Junction a few weeks ago and while Carshalton looked scarcely changed I hardly recognised Hackbridge.

Nor me. Far too much of a concrete jungle if memory serves me correctly.

Always has been rough - or at least part of it has. I got told on good authority that it was jointly built by the London Borough of Sutton and the GLC and while Sutton treated it as a model estate and offered properties to its best tenants the GLC used it as a dumping ground for the worst. 15 years after it was built, you could still see the divide. My senior school was less than half a mile away, so I had experience of some of those that lived there.

I'm actually a Londoner who moved to Yorkshire 36 years ago. I went to Halifax RLFC on the first weekend I moved and followed the team home and away for about 15 years, then became an occasional supporter as I switched to speedway. For one reason and another, I switched back to RL full time a couple of years back and watch Siddal, who play in the National Conference League Premier Division (the highest standard of amateur RL in the UK). One speedway meeting at Belle Vue or Sheffield would cost me about £30, at Siddal I cam see almost the entire home season for that (although I take in most of the away matches as well). I have been to Halifax once or twice recently but haven't seen Super League live for many years. SL clubs lost an average of £1m in 2022 which, in the long run, isn't sustainable even if it is relatively small compared to Championship football (£15m) or half that of the existing Premiership RU clubs (£2m). In addition, it hasn't seen the high profile bankruptcy of the likes of Worcester, Wasps, London Irish or, very recently, Jersey Reds. Having said that, both Newcastle Thunder and London Skolars closed down at the end of the season and, taken with those SL losses even if RL isn't quite as badly off as RU it isn't by any means financially sound. I always liked going to Wakefield's Belle Vue ground. Halifax usually won there