DS Forums

 
 

Question Time 08/12/2016


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-12-2016, 20:51
rfonzo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,640
Mensch giving wollastonite colon an examination..........from the inside
What a brown noser
I thought that was quite hideous as well. In fact I find the woman quite displeasure.
rfonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 09-12-2016, 21:05
CappySpectrum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,973
Oh the shaking the hands part like I've just got you back into politics?
CappySpectrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2016, 21:06
angarrack
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,404
Has it occurred to anyone, that Self is quite deliberately rude ? He writes for a living, gets loadsa feedback, knows exactly the effect of what he says ........... The thing he's NOT trying to do is win votes ..........
You're right that Self isn't trying to win votes.

That would be too difficult for him. It's much easier being on the sidelines where he can criticise and sneer. You would think, listening to him, that he had all the answers. But all you get is negativity, no proposals, no policies, nothing on which he could be held to account.

Some people are rude and get away with it if they have some redeeming characteristics, but Self clearly has a problem. He is sneeringly rude and not much else. He sounds like a very bitter man.
angarrack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2016, 21:28
angarrack
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,404
That woman with the innovative idea of rebalancing our national budget! How dare she come on telly and put a well reasoned opinion across!
Every now and then someone on QT makes a sensible original suggestion.

So original that Dimbleby is clearly taken aback, being more accustomed to fielding muddled or stereotypical responses from the audience.

What happens next is the member of the audience is asked to repeat what she has said; Dimbleby then hands it over to a panellist who talks about something completely different, either because they haven't grasped the point, or because they don't want to handle it.

Dimbleby fails completely. He doesn't make anything of such originality and he doesn't stop the panellist going off at a tangent rather than answer the point. He quickly moves on to something else and the point is lost.

On this occasion the idea was clearly explained more than once by the audience member. 'Use some of the overseas aid budget to fund the NHS costs of illegal migrants'. There is some logic in linking the two and worth considering and debating, but, as anything original invariably does on this programme, it got lost amongst all the handwringing and partisan point scoring.
angarrack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2016, 21:33
Penny Crayon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,482
Every now and then someone on QT makes a sensible original suggestion.

So original that Dimbleby is clearly taken aback, being more accustomed to fielding muddled or stereotypical responses from the audience.

What happens next is the member of the audience is asked to repeat what she has said; Dimbleby then hands it over to a panellist who talks about something completely different, either because they haven't grasped the point, or because they don't want to handle it.

Dimbleby fails completely. He doesn't make anything of such originality and he doesn't stop the panellist going off at a tangent rather than answer the point. He quickly moves on to something else and the point is lost.

On this occasion the idea was clearly explained more than once by the audience member. 'Use some of the overseas aid budget to fund the NHS costs of illegal migrants'. There is some logic in linking the two and worth considering and debating, but, as anything original invariably does on this programme, it got lost amongst all the handwringing and partisan point scoring.

Is the cost of treating illegal immigrants really extortionate then? I say that because I really have no idea - if it is really huge then I'd say that was a good idea - if it's not that much (relatively) would it be worth setting up a costly system to deal with it|?

Sorry but I haven't a clue.
Penny Crayon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2016, 21:51
angarrack
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,404
Is the cost of treating illegal immigrants really extortionate then? I say that because I really have no idea - if it is really huge then I'd say that was a good idea - if it's not that much (relatively) would it be worth setting up a costly system to deal with it|?

Sorry but I haven't a clue.
I've no idea either, but its worth looking into and debating. Unless its debated when the question comes up we won't know.

The labour MP who was supposed to answer went off at the usual tangent whenever the words NHS and migrants are used in the same sentence. 'The NHS depends on migrants to survive', he said, or words to that effect. In fact nothing at all to do with funding or the cost of illegal migrants.

As often happens, Dimbleby chose not to insist on a proper reply to an original idea. Yet he earlier allowed one audience member to ramble on and on about brexit without anything new being said.
angarrack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2016, 22:00
burneside
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Isle of Dogs
Posts: 2,137
Every now and then someone on QT makes a sensible original suggestion.

So original that Dimbleby is clearly taken aback, being more accustomed to fielding muddled or stereotypical responses from the audience.

What happens next is the member of the audience is asked to repeat what she has said; Dimbleby then hands it over to a panellist who talks about something completely different, either because they haven't grasped the point, or because they don't want to handle it.

Dimbleby fails completely. He doesn't make anything of such originality and he doesn't stop the panellist going off at a tangent rather than answer the point. He quickly moves on to something else and the point is lost.

On this occasion the idea was clearly explained more than once by the audience member. 'Use some of the overseas aid budget to fund the NHS costs of illegal migrants'. There is some logic in linking the two and worth considering and debating, but, as anything original invariably does on this programme, it got lost amongst all the handwringing and partisan point scoring.
Why only NHS costs? It should be possible to calculate all the drains on the public purse e.g. housing and other benefits.
burneside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2016, 22:22
angarrack
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,404
Why only NHS costs? It should be possible to calculate all the drains on the public purse e.g. housing and other benefits.
Yes, although the question was about how to increase funding to the NHS.

Is all the overseas aid budget being spent wisely? If not, apportioning some to the NHS on the grounds that it is being used by illegals is worth considering.
angarrack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2016, 22:35
Nosedive
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,655
I've no idea either, but its worth looking into and debating. Unless its debated when the question comes up we won't know.

The labour MP who was supposed to answer went off at the usual tangent whenever the words NHS and migrants are used in the same sentence. 'The NHS depends on migrants to survive', he said, or words to that effect. In fact nothing at all to do with funding or the cost of illegal migrants.

As often happens, Dimbleby chose not to insist on a proper reply to an original idea. Yet he earlier allowed one audience member to ramble on and on about brexit without anything new being said.
I'm really glad you folks picked up on this point. I saw it pointed out at the time on page 8 of this thread reading it back tonight, but thought it was too far back to pick up on.

But yes, it really annoyed me too. I viewed it as a deliberate and selfish hijacking of the debate and it should NOT have been allowed. That woman in the audience should have stood up and shouted for Mr Chairman to shut him up.

As previously mentioned Dimbleby was either confused by it at the time and unable to deal with it, or the voice in his ear piece was saying "No, let him carry on, it's good."
Nosedive is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:33.