June 16th, 2014

More Tory MPs Attack Oxfam

As Guido reported yesterday, the third sector Labour sleepers are up in arms about Tory MP Conor Burns daring to attack them. Their letter makes the Times, while two more Tory MPs have piled in on Burns’ side. Firstly, Priti Patel on ConservativeHome:

“Those charities that are escalating their political campaigns now in advance of the next election are not only misleading the public but also betraying their supporters and the work that they do. Members of the public who donate to these charities, and taxpayers who also support them through the grants that various Government departments give them, are shocked that they are effectively subsidising political campaigning rather than the delivery of frontline services.”

And Dominic Raab in the Speccie:

“Oxfam’s ad misrepresents its report. Its report smacks of political bias. And the charity has become a revolving door for Labour figures. One of Oxfam’s most effective campaigns has been against tax evasion. Yet, its partisan approach is a gross abuse of its own tax status. If it wants to jettison its independence, it can enjoy all the campaigning freedom in the world – but, then, it must give up the public subsidy.”

IEA wonk Ryan Bourne’s thoughts on the subject are also worth a read:

“Oxfam should be called out for adopting the typical left-wing dogma of equating poverty and inequality and blaming all negative outcomes on the market economy, for example. Most public understanding of the word poverty is poverty in an absolute sense.

Oxfam and others’ approach to poverty is essentially materialist – the idea that all that matters is income, whatever the source. Yet this is treating the symptom of poverty rather than the ultimate causes.

For them there is no problem to which the solution is not more government. They carry just a 3-iron when the world is complex, and the structural problems of our economy require a full set of clubs.”

The IEA’s Christopher Snowden has also been crunching the numbers over the Times letter:

Of the 75 organisations that put their name to the letter, 56 are charities. Of these charities, at least 37 (66%) receive money from the government—central, European and/or local. In most cases, their state funding makes up a very significant part of their income. For example, NAVCA—whose stated charitable purpose is to ‘exert influence on government policy’—relies on DfE, the Home Office, the Office for Civil Society, the Ministry of Justice, DoH and the lottery for most of its income. Concern Worldwide gets nearly £5 million per annum from DfID in addition to funds from the Scottish government. Children England gets more than 90 per cent of its income from the government, as does Keep Britain Tidy.

The list goes on. Friends of the Earth are heavily dependent on grants from the EU. Health Poverty Action, ActionAid, BOND, the Canon Collins Educational and Legal Assistance Trust and Progressio are funded by DfID. The European Commission funds the Jubilee Debt Campaign, Progressio, ActionAid and the Runnymede Trust. The Scottish government funds SCVO, Energy Action Scotland and the Scottish Out of School Care Network. The Welsh government funds Concern Worldwide and Children in Wales. Manchester Community Central appears to be wholly funded by the state via DfE, NHS Manchester and Manchester City Council. Woodcraft Folk is funded by the lottery and by the International Falcon Movement: Socialist Educational International, which, in turn, is funded by the European Commission. Other signatories receive taxpayer funding via BIS, the FSA, DWP, DoH and DCSF.

Government funding the lobbying of the government.


93 Comments

  1. 1
    táxpáyér says:

    Rather proves his point about political “charities”.

    Shouldn’t tax business or charities and “charities” shouldn’t get money from the state, especially fascist ones like the greens.

    Like

    • 5
      It Takes one to know one says:

      “One of Oxfam’s most effective campaigns has been against tax evasion.”

      How much tax does OXFAM pay?

      Like

    • 9
      Lost in Lefty La La land says:

      A Charity set up to relieve famine is complaining about food banks set up to relieve benefits?

      Like

    • 22
      Hows about saying Thank you for the dosh instead? says:

      Like

      • 78
        Twats says:

        You Twats. Britain is so unequal that it is YOUR number one donor. You really are TWATS.

        I hope the government stops funding you. It Should and it would if Cameron had any Balls.

        Like

    • 83
      Tom Catesby. says:

      The likes of ‘NAVCA’ don’t sound much like a charity to me, living on public money to, ‘exert influence on government policy’, sounds just like the sort of thing private ‘consultancies’ do, to exert influence on ministers and government departments on behalf of clients, full time paid lobbyists.

      Like

    • 93
      Rhyfelwyr says:

      ‘especially fascist ones like the greens’.

      Do elucidate…

      Like

  2. 2
    New Labour says:

    Like I said earlier…

    http://www.willtowin.org.uk/

    Labour PPC who was working for JP Morgan during the boom years, but suddenly found a conscience and started working for Oxfam…. just before getting selected.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/joris-luyendijk-banking-blog/2013/mar/18/bankers-traded-city-oxfam

    Like

    • 6
      New Labour says:

      “when I told them I was going to work for Oxfam for a fraction my salary, well, what do you say to that? They did ask: “Can’t we send you to Singapore? Give a good relocation package?” But I didn’t want to go Singapore. I wanted to work for Oxfam in London.

      People always knew that I was relatively leftwing, so in that sense it probably didn’t come as a complete surprise”

      Like

  3. 3
    Ed Moribund says:

    No more public money for Oxfam. The state must stop lobbying itself for more of our money.

    And scrap the 0.7% nonsense too. If Oxfam care about UK poverty, they must agree, surely?

    Like

    • 74
      Llareggub says:

      If you’re looking for ways to relieve third-world poverty, may I suggest that you support Kiva.org.

      It’s a fantastic American charity that invests in people in the third world (including eastern Europe) who desire to set up a business or expand their present occupations. Without that capital, their family is condemned to endlessly struggle to put food in their mouths. With the expanded business that comes with the capital, the family will have an extra income, enabling them to feed and clothe themselves adequately, perhaps send their children to school.

      Kiva works with a string of micro-finance organisations around the world. The local organisations identify local needy people, and Kiva seeks to raise the money for them. You are not donating your money, but investing it. The beneficiary is expected to repay it entirely, and most do. You are then free to have your money returned to you (no interest is payable), or to re-invest it with somebody else.

      The sums involved are tiny, starting at a few tens of dollars, up to a couple of hundred. It’s shocking to think that, for want of what we might spend on a single night out, a family in Africa or South America is incapable of lifting itself beyond the breadline.

      Getting a bank loan is usually out of the question for them. They rarely have any worthwhile collateral. There may well be no banks for miles. And the sums they are requesting probably would be of little interest to a commercial bank in any case.

      There might be a villager in Uganda who owns a couple of goats. Just doubling his flock would make all the difference. So you, and numerous others around the world, can invest a part or all the capital he needs to buy another couple of goats. His family’s whole life changes, and he repays your investment.

      So you then invest that money again in a woman in Samoa. She bakes a few pies that she sells. She could sell so many more, if she could just afford the extra raw ingredients. So you make your investment, her life is transformed, and she repays your money.

      So you invest it in a market trader in Bulgaria. He sells a few clothes, but if he could afford to buy in better quality clothing, he could charge a higher profit margin. You invest your money, he buys in the new stock, his life is transformed, and he repays your investment.

      So if all you can afford is £10, that money will keep circulating as long as you want it to, changing lives around the world.

      I’m not one to shamelessly promote charities, but if thrid-world poverty relief is what excites you, I can’t think of a more-effective way to spend your money than Kiva.org. If you can only aford a tiny amount, give it to Oxfam, and it will be spent once on … well, you hope it’ll be worthwhile, but you will never know. Give it to Kiva.org, and you will know exactly how the money is being spent, who is benefiting, how they’re benefiting, and once your money’s job is done, you can use it again for somebody else. Even if you can afford to lend just £10, you could help hundreds of people urn their lives around.

      And of course, as they improve their lives, they spend their income in their communities, benefiting their neighbours. It’s a fantastic scheme.

      http://www.kiva.org/

      Like

  4. 4
    David Cameron says:

    Something else i’ll do fuck all about.

    Like

  5. 8
    The British media are cunts says:

    The left are very good at spending tax payers money on large salaries and champers.

    Like

    • 10
      The Labour Party says:

      All your money belongs to us.

      Like

      • 29
        Llareggub says:

        Come the great revolution, there will be no money. Everybody will be happy to work his best and hardest for the good of the community, and receive from the state according to his needs. Everybody else will be shot. Worked a treat under Pol Pot.

        Like

  6. 11
    Rob Roy says:

    So Blair needs psychiatric help, Clegg is clinically depressed, Miliband is weird and Cameron just bumbles along.

    Yet every man and his dog is lining up to get us Scots to vote to continue the status quo.

    Vote Yes for independence; things can hardly get worse.

    Like

    • 14
      Anonymous says:

      Bye. Don’t forget your passport.

      Like

      • 71

        Salmond has yet to work out how he’s going to organise and fund a passport-issuing authority. It seems the Scot Nats hadn’t given much thought to this one. Griping about Bannockburn and Culloden, and those fucking sassenach bastards, is so much more fun when you’re downing your fifth dram. Who wants to discuss passports during a sesh down the pub?

        Like

        • 84
          SIZE 15 CARBON FOOTPRINT says:

          Culloden there’s one for you, there were more scots fighting in the government side than the jacobite side !

          Like

        • 85
          Tom Catesby. says:

          Of course, their old EU ones will be no good will they, I can see passport check queues stretching from Metalbridge to Carlisle.

          Like

    • 18
      Socialism is theft says:

      Close the door on your way out – and keep out.

      Like

    • 21
      Llareggub says:

      They can’t? By all accounts, Salmond is shaping up to be a tyrant, and I assume his cybernats will be happy to populate his secret police.

      You think I’m being absurd? Just look at the way he’s conducting his campaign. He’s no democrat.

      Other ways that it could get worse: you still haven’t sorted out what you’re going to do for a currency (you really should get on to that), still no plan for a tax system, no plan for a border control system, still not clear whether you’ll be able to join the EU or not (has Salmond actually got around to taking legal advice on that one yet?), no serious plan for a military and coastal and fisheries protection (you don’t think you’ll get into the EU if your coasts are riddled with pirates, do you — which they will be if you don’t protect them)– and that’s just what pops into my mind off the top of my head.

      Like

      • 32
        How dare you says:

        Strange how easy Ireland found it to break away from the UK, so the Scots are not up voting YES and to running their own country that’s not a surprise, considering the trash they allowed to run it in 1997 to 2010, then why have they a Parliament it’s not needed if they stay in the UK, they have a Parliament and it’s up to them to vote YES and they can sort out the problems as they come along, which the main one is servicing the trillions we owe to the world.

        Like

        • 49
          Haughy says:

          Easy, apart from remaining poor till the EU (ie we again) took over funding it, corupt politicians, in thrall to religious loons and perves.

          Like

        • 62
          Llareggub says:

          For God’s sake, Ireland left the UK a century ago. You may have noticed the world was a bit different then.

          Besides, I don’t know much about Irish independence, and I don’t suppose you do either. Maybe they had a concrete, thought-through plan in place. There’s an old maxim that “If you fail to plan, you plan to fail.” Scotland’s independence plan is a joke.

          Like

        • 73
          bergen says:

          Easy? They had a civil war after independence which was far worse than the “tan war” that preceded it. Its politics were poisonous for decades thereafter.

          Like

      • 41
        Dangerous Brian says:

        The only democracy that Socialists understand is their own brand.
        It worked in Germany for quite a few years under Adolf.

        Like

    • 24
      Mycroft says:

      No loss, get out, you’re on your own… don’t come back.

      Like

      • 61
        Bob Rusk says:

        One would hope that we won’t be bailing you lot out when things inevitably go tits up.

        Like

        • 64
          Llareggub says:

          You won’t be able to afford to.

          By the way, had you noticed that the UK (yes, the same one that you’re planning to quit) is the fastest-growing economy in the western hemisphere? Faster than Germany. Faster than the USA.

          All that growth is being generated by Scotland, is it?

          Like

        • 65
          Llareggub says:

          Sorry for the previous comment. Only just realised you’re talking about England bailing out Scotland, not vice versa, which would have been an absurd notion.

          Like

    • 76
      The two Muppets says:

      And Gordon Brown was normal .

      Like

  7. 12
    Llareggub says:

    Why is the government giving so much of our money away anyway? Why is my money being given to charities that I would never support were they to ask me directly for a donation? Charities like ASH, which is funded almost entirely by the government, and exists to, errmm, lobby the government.

    Government funding of charities should be terminated, and the savings cut from the tax burden. We will then be that much more better off to support the charities ourselves, and they can appeal to us directly for donations. If they can’t survive that way, they should never have existed in the first place.

    Like

  8. 13
    We're looking for says:

    Just look at the hundreds of “jobs”…

    https://twitter.com/oxfamgbjobs

    Like

  9. 15
    London Dave says:

    Politicians proposing to rob Peter to pay Paul will always get the vote of Paul.

    Like

  10. 20
    Fake Charities says:

    We need more of your money now. Our Chief Executive salaries depend on it.

    Like

    • 47
      Llareggub says:

      Can I be a charity? Call it “The Llareggub Inebriation Fund.” All donations gratefully received, and will be dedicated exclusively to progressing the charity’s important work. Please use Gift Aid, so I can get even more of your dosh.

      Like

  11. 23
    How dare you says:

    This charity argument, will like lots of other arguments, the last/present government (don’t think we will have future government after 1st November 2014) will just carry on and allow to fester and we will be still going on about it, until we forced by force or we end up in a civil disturbance, I get the impression these governments are just ticking over doing minimum and just waiting on “events” like the EU dictatorship takeover to happen.

    Like

    • 44
      Perry Neeham says:

      Try using more full stops.

      Like

    • 59
      rollo57 says:

      That’s exactly what they’re doing!
      Cameron is biding his time till the QMV comes in, then he can say we need EU approval for a referendum. By this time the TTIP will have been signed and we will have lost all our sovereign and democratic rights. We all become Corporate slaves in the biggest United Corporate States of Europe.
      The majority will be working for minimum wage topped up with benefits, working at least 25 hours a week, to ensure EVERYONE works!

      I for one hope the Scots have left, as they will not be controlled by the TTIP and will find solace in the fact it is receiving so many ‘new’ immigrants.

      Like

    • 86
      Tom Catesby. says:

      ‘Charity’ has become a massive ‘industry’, many thousands of none producers are ‘employed by these organisations, these are the full time professional ‘charity blaggers’, soaking up millions, this lets down the many genuine volunteers, unpaid and giving freely of their time and effort to support what the believe to be decent worthwhile causes.

      Like

  12. 25
    Will says:

    Long term charities will be big losers as donors start looking more into what charities do. A lot of money spent on charities is wasted. We not how charities getting more shrill in trying to get a bigger slice of the charity pie. The problem is the uk public is now starting to question how effective some charities are as quite a few are just used for tax avoidance or a middle class job creation scheme.

    Like

    • 50
      Llareggub says:

      Never mind the vast quantities of donations spent on administration (or, in the case of the RSPCA, paid to lawyers — they weren’t mentioned last time an RSPCA volunteer was pleading with me about the poor little doggies and kitties), how much of the money that does actually reach their projects is spent wisely and sensibly?

      I heard of one charity which set up a fish-processing plant on shore of Lake Victoria. But with no onward-distribution network, it was unviable and went bust in no time. The charity hadn’t actually thought through its plans that far down the line. All that money donated by kind citizens seeking to relieve poverty in Africa squandered.

      Another scheme created a cooperative for bee keepers in Equador. But the bee keepers weren’t capable of producing the quantities of honey required by large distributors. The best the charity could suggest was that the bee keepers should stockpile all their honey until they had a large-enough quantity to market. Which would have left the bee keepers with no income at all for several years.

      Who was it who said “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”?

      Like

  13. 26
    A Glacier Calves Icebergs...That's what glaciers do says:

    Like

    • 51
      Llareggub says:

      Global warming can’t be making them all that much hungrier. There hasn’t been any for the last couple of decades.

      Like

    • 81
      Vlad the Loudhailer says:

      Yes, particularly the climate scientists for more taxpayers money, so they can continue to publish more in depth statics that prove more research is imperative.

      Like

  14. 27
    So What's New ? says:

    Chris Grayling Is A Lying Bastard Court Hears At Workfare Tribunal http://wp.me/p1Awq-25n

    Like

  15. 28
    askerratt says:

    Priti an expert on lying and misleading

    Sent from Samsung Mobile

    Like

  16. 30
    Will says:

    The letter in the times today refers to burka rights in the uk, well Joanna Lumley was probably more effective in 3 months than the organisation were for years before, also lead in petrol removal, well that was an eu directive that would have forced us to remove lead in petrol. The problem is that charities spend more time making donors feel guilty about giving more rather than actually do what they were set up to do.

    Like

  17. 31
    Michael Gove says:

    What Hasn’t Mrs May Twerked On?

    Like

  18. 33
    David Cameron says:

    I cut out the middle man by sending my left over food to the starving third worlders in Tower Hamlets.

    Like

    • 54
      Llareggub says:

      When I was a bording-school kid, the teachers told me so often to think of the starving millions that one day, I scraped my plate off into the post box!

      Like

  19. 34
    Socialists are full of shit says:

    A leftwinger wont do bugger all for free.
    Even the unwashed hippy class who go to charity concerts are rewarded with a full days entertainment by many artists for the price of a Robbie Williams solo concert ticket.
    Fucking good value if you like that sort of thing.

    Like

  20. 36
    Sir Nob Skelpoff says:

    All these ‘charities’ are nice little earners for the favoured, champagne socialists or hoorah henries to dumb to be employed hoodwinking the masses in politics.
    Top employee remuneration in Oxfam:
    17 on £60,000 to £69,999
    13 on £70,000 to £79,999
    6 on £80,000 to £89,999
    4 on £90,000 to £99,999
    2 on £100,000 to £109,999
    1 on £110,000 to £119,999

    Even the CEO of the Dog’s Trust is on about £100K….

    Source Charities commission website were they have to publish all of their accounts.

    http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/

    L

    Like

  21. 37
    Anonymous says:

    Why would anyone give money to Oxfam? I came across this charity recently http://www.friendsofquettahospital.org It ‘has no overheads and administration costs are given voluntarily, so that every penny given as a donation goes directly to the hospital.’ It’s an example more charities should follow.

    Like

    • 60
      Llareggub says:

      My grandmother spent decades working two afternoons a week in her local Oxfam shop. She’d lived in India before WW2, teaching in an orphanage for street children in Calcutta (two of them actually flew over to attend her funeral, one of them, wearing his old school blazer, telling me quite openly, “Everything I have is thanks to people like your grandmother”). After returning to the UK, she still felt strongly about third-world poverty, and continued to work in a dozen ways for it.

      I doubt whether my grandmother would consider working for Oxfam today. A staunch Conservative, I think she’d have been appalled by this. Back in the 1970’s and 1980’s, Oxfam’s work was centred very much upon relieving third-world poverty — The OXford Society for FAMine Relief is how it originated. But today, she’d have recoiled at the thought that a charity that exists ostensibly to help the poor of the third world was actually using its money to attack the British government’s economic policies.

      They are collecting money under false pretences. All their publicity focusses on tearful, skinny African babies. I’ve never seen an Oxfam promotion soliciting donations to lobby the British government’s economic policies.

      Like

      • 63
        poi says:

        Thanks Llareggub

        Touching and well said – I wouldn’t give Oxfam a cup of spit. Socialists, Marxists and useful idiots to a man.

        Like

  22. 39
    How dare you says:

    The biggest charities that need to be closed down are the quango’s, oh ! I just realised Camoron was going to do the bonfire of the quango’s, what happened Camoron, no backbone.

    Like

  23. 40
    Naive and Innocent says:

    I used to think that people who worked for charities did it for love, not money. I was shocked when I found out a few years ago that this was not the case, and that charity workers are actually paid salaries out of the charity’s income to do charity work, and aren’t volunteers!

    Like

  24. 42
    White supremacist says:

    Charities with their adverts confirm peoples prejudices that black people are useless without honky.
    Thanks OXFAM.

    Like

  25. 55
    WoRaft Chihuahua says:

    Dame Barbara Stocking stepped down from Oxfam in 2013 and now is president of a Cambridge college.

    Wiki:

    Under Stocking’s leadership, “turnover has hit £300m. Oxfam now has more than 750 shops in the UK, 6,000 staff all over the world and sister organisations in 13 countries. Oxfam officials have gone from the charity into government and helped make new Labour the most charitable administration ever

    That is, a charity sponsored the penetration of government by people whose main concern is other than the welfare of people in Britain. I doubt if this is what donors to Oxfam thought they were paying for. Oxfam is now trying to act as an alternative government in the UK. It hopes to use charitable funding to short-circuit the process, instead of going through the slog of being elected.

    Seven hundred and fifty shops largely staffed by voluntary labour just means that those who might otherwise run dress agencies and secondhand-goods shops face unfair competition. They will never get beyond being car-boot operators because they do not get the preferential rates and charitable status, let alone be given free labour by the job centre sending unpaid shop assistants to them.

    We need to look at whether this charity is now an angel or a vampire, taking not just what people give of their own volition, but sinking its fangs in to the body politic and sucking.

    Like

    • 87
      Tom Catesby. says:

      Do a trawl of any typical UK high street these days, the only shops that seem busy or even open, are the charity shops. Of these OXFAM stands out in my experience as one of, if not, the most expensive.

      Like

  26. 56
    David Cameron says:

    My favourite bumsex charity is Stonewall .

    Like

  27. 58
    Screwed Taxpayer says:

    The whole concept of Government subsidies to “charities” is a fucking nonsense.

    Their income should be from private individuals or businesses given on an entirely voluntary basis.

    The ConLibLabbers are extorting money from taxpayers to give to these parasitical organisations.

    GET A GRIP DAVE. ( Sorry – I forgot. You are a gutless tosser who will do nothing significantly to cut Government expenditure, as usual. )

    Like

    • 88
      Tom Catesby. says:

      Government should not be financing charities with taxpayers money, they should be financing departments to do the work they are supposed to do.

      Like

  28. 67
    Anonymous says:

    As usual they’ve got the message completely wrong.

    Remove the political points scoring and talk about how all these scumbags draw salaries from charities.

    Decent human beings do charity work for free, not for payment.

    Hammer that home and watch as joe public form up behind you.

    Or to put in more of a ranty way:

    Only the worst kind of scum leeches charity money from those it’s supposed to help. These are not capable people that charities need to pay competitively to get – that’s a massive lie designed to give incompetent wastes of oxygen a seat on the gravy train.

    If they were that good, they’d have a proper job and would offer their spare time to the charities – not for money, but due to a genuine desire to give something back.

    Just another way of leeching from the poor to line the pockets of people who think in the “correct way”.

    Doesn’t it make you sick?

    Like

  29. 68

    My family only donates to local charities that actually do what it says on the tin such as the local Hospice or animal rescue centre We do donate to the RNLI because they don’t take the governments shilling and is manned by brave volunteers

    Like

  30. 75
    there's no such thing as a free lunch says:

    BURP!!!!!

    Like

  31. 77
    Anon says:

    Add the RSPCA, to say nothing of the BBC and RSA – all run by Labour and happy to pour out left wing lies and disinformation.

    Like

  32. 79

    Tomorrow Green Peas, day after Amnasty so on and so forth, s’game innit?

    Like

  33. 82
    ron Vibbentrop says:

    FUCK OFF OXFAM.

    Like

  34. 90
    Aparat says:

    Naturally, none of the articles addresses why nothing is done about this explicit partisanship, because, I suspect, the authors don’t want to face the truth: the Cameroons support it. After all, how better to show your compassionate side, than adressing the charities’ concerns, whilst using your chums in the so-called right-wing media to spread the view that Downing St. is just as frustrated as you are? Kill two birds with one stone, so to speak.

    Priti Patel may be angry, but so what? Her article will have faded after a few days and is on a site that 99% of the population don’t read. Once she has her ministerial post, she’ll dutifully do as she’s told, which presupposes she would object to anything asked of her.

    It is pointless questioning the lack of action on something Downing St. has ample power to change – No. 10 and, for that matter, No. 11 and the Home Office and the Dept. for Education and DfID and DEFRA and the rest see no wrong in any of it. They’re not Tories, they’re European Social Democrats.

    Vote UKIP.

    Like


Seen Elsewhere

Does Europe Really Want Britain to Quit? | Nick Wood
Immigration Nation | Hopi Sen
Tories Choose Anti-Israel Candidate in Rochester | JC
Osborne’s Daycare Obsession is a Time Bomb | Kathy Gyngell
BBC Marr Pinko Trying to Ban the Queen | Speccie
Eric Hobsbawm: Companion of Dishonour | Standpoint
Guido Party Gossip | Iain Dale
Russell Brand Comes Out as 9/11 Truther | Guardian
Health Revolution is Underway | Fraser Nelson
UKIP Gets Professional | Red Box
Kelly Tolhurst Wins Rochester Open Primary | BBC


VOTER-RECALL
Find out more about PLMR


Austrian Chancellor Werner Faymann on Cameron’s refusal to pay the £1.7 billion EU bill by December 1st:

“Well, then he’s gonna pay on December 2nd”



Mycroft says:

Have you read the last bit of Animal Farm?

You know where the animals are looking through the Farmhouse window?

My TV screen was that window at lunch-time today.

Be careful, the sudden self-congratulatory tone, the slightly pudgy outline of indulgence and you become exactly what you should despise.

The jolly face of the Quisling Cameron poses for your camera has mesmerised and deceived you, you who were once not so deceived.

You were no firebrand, you were a damp squib in my opinion, sorry.

You need a damned good kick up the ahse!


Tip off Guido
Web Guido's Archives

Subscribe me to:






RSS




AddThis Feed Button
Archive


Labels
Guido Reads
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,544 other followers