ECCOnoob

Maybe refresh yourself what you said at post #9. YOU asked for an argument so that is why I've specifically picked out YOUR posts.

Quite ironic comment considering your own earlier posts boldly declaring statements like "argue with that" and "enough said" Makes it sound as if somehow what you're coming out with is beyond debate. You can have your opinions on whether you like them, whether you choose to watch them, why you don't understand how they are so popular... But when you come out with nonsense like they have no talent I'm going to call you out on it. Clearly that is not the case. Two of them have had well over a decade or more as entertainers before their current primetime thing. One through acting and presenting the other through singing and performing. The third has spent years working as a high level barrister at the criminal bar before successfully auditioning for his own show and now transferred to the network's flagship programs. Regardless of whether you personally like them, it is blatantly obvious they have some kind of talent otherwise they wouldn't have been the ones who made it to the big leagues out of the thousands of showbiz wannabes and has-beens churning through the system every year, nor would they keep earning big paychecks to front the big shows would they.

Well firstly I have no desire to have a career in television or on stage. Secondly, unlike the three people you are singling out, I don't have any training, skills or experience in performing or broadcast presenting. Now. Do you have anything to actually to debate or just resorting to silly name calling and emojis.

Jesus, you are hard work. What the hell do you mean they are not entertainers. For the record, Robert Rinder isn't a judge. He presents a spoof courtroom style arbitration show which is primarily for the purpose of entertainment. Do you seriously think Judge Rinder is a real courtroom? I have just said earlier, Allison has done acting before big brother appearance . Rylan, well before X factor was already a model, singer and performer in various venues. How is that not entertainment experience. They're not producing documentaries or reading the news. Just what do you think television presenting is. Their positions on big brother or x factor, which are nothing more than glorified game shows, is irrelevant. It still doesn't detract from their basic talent and popularity. I don't disagree that they are Marmite to the viewers. That's no different to any other personality past or present. Even some of the so-called stars of yesterday I couldn't stand. However, get over yourself with your judgement that they are not talented or entertaining. To some people they are and that's exactly why they get paid to front programs year after year.

Quite easily. One completed training through television workshops including acting as a teenager in several dramas and has consistently undertaken television, radio presenting work for the past 20 years. Another is a former singer who was performed in several tribute acts before breaking into television performing. The third is a fully qualified barrister who spent many years working at the criminal bar in complex fraud, white collar crime and anti money laundering work before successfully auditioning into front his own court arbitration show and now obtaining several other prime presenting roles. They are all earning six figure salaries out of their television draw, presenting skills and talent. You are free to not like them, you are free to not watch them, You are free to declare them rubbish. But let's not talk nonsense. They all clearly have some 'talent'. I dare say probably more than you have. Talentless people do not have decades long careers in television and media.

Oh come off it. You seriously think that the worship over the cult of celebrity is a new thing. The media format might have changed but dont kid yourself. There were Z-listers, attention seekers, wannabes and eccentrics desperate for their 5 minutes of fame just as much back in the black and white days. The tabloids were just as interested in tittle tattle and who was shagging who just as much. There were still gossip magazines and saucy stories. There was the publicity stunts. There was plenty of talent contests and freak shows where the viewers could all gather round on a Saturday night to point and laugh. There was the playboy and page 3 hopefuls thrusting their only two talents in the faces of anyone with a camera. Even the foundations of modern day 'reality television' and 'real people's stories' can be traced to shows made as far back as the late 50s. Its not about people "coming back to their senses". Their behaviour now is the same people's behaviour back then so lets not go in denial. From the screaming hordes following their music idols..... To the groupies bashing down dressing room doors to get to touch their favourite TV star... To the magazines flying off the shelves with the latest stories about the rocky relationship of Burton v Taylor or the salty demise of Maryln Monroe or some human interest puff piece about the woman with 21 kids or the man whose bread roll looked like the face of Big Daddy. We had people famous for just being in a TV advert (one noted example was the 'face' of British Airways who had to stop being a air hostess on regular flights because she was hounded by passengers wanting an autograph). We had people famous because they performed a party trick on Nationwide. We had people famous for just being Miss Swindon 1967. We had people famous because they could rip a phone book in half. Stop trying to make out that your generation is somehow more culturally superior to the current one just because, I fully suspect, you simply dont understand it. Fact is, even in the black and white days there was an element of trash that was lapped up just as much as anything today.

Interesting. But lets have a hypothetical here. Say, Rayner was found to have done said wrongdoing many years prior, but meaning on the above rule Police can take no action. Do you think it would play out well for her if she smugly sat there going "ner ner you cant get me, you are statute barred" Like I said earlier. Even if no criminal element can be brought, there are still some political risks here. As someone who is particularly vocal when dishing it out to others, she may need to think very carefully. To the fickle public it might still look like 'party of the people' MP trying to fudge things for tax dodge.

I trust my team at work. But if I was making a public statement regards someone potentially facing criminal charges, I'd make damn sure I glance over it myself first. The man is supposed to be a senior lawyer for god sake. He more than anyone should know that fully being informed of the facts with supportive evidence is crucial. I'm sure lots of the post office managers and directors trusted what their teams were telling them at the time too.

Let's just wait and see what happens. Funny how some people appear content for the police not to re-investigate something when potentially new evidence comes to light. Wonder if they'd feel the same if the protagonist in this story was different. As for the grandiose gesture, well to me, that just seems like the sort of bold attention seeking comment typical of the mouthy mare to come out with... tick tock tick tock see how long it will be before she starts bluffing, blustering and misdirecting. Wouldn't be the first time. Even if no criminal aspect is brought doesn't automatically mean it won't be damaging politically. We had it with beergate. No criminal charges, lots of bold brash statements claiming "Angela wasn't there".... then it turned out to be complete tosh when photographs categorically showed her there. Along came the but but but excuses and meak apologies.

Oh really. In your expert opinion then - just how long do you think it should take to thoroughly complete an Inquiry of events stretching back 20+ years, involving tens of thousands of documents and witness testimony from potentially 120 or more witnesses based on current discovery.

I'm sorry but you are completely exaggerating and doomongering again. Every child in this country has basic level of mandatory schooling. They are now been kept in school up to 18. Those 'working classes', as I said earlier, are not going down some mine or stuck in some factory for 14 hours a day, many of those working classes are doing equivalent to 'white collar' 'middle class' jobs as the world of work and technology has evolved. Luxuries which for previous generations will have been for the absolutely elite are now more open for all. Even those on so called modest earnings now have potential to travel abroad, obtain domestic appliances, and abundance of cheap food, consumer goods and clothing. You're never going to get equality across the country, but let's not make out that all of the north is some grim industrial wasteland stuck in the past. Even in our own city we have evolved with the next generation living and working in professional occupations, skilled trades and degree level careers not bemoaning the effects of Thatcher and sat on their behind waiting for the next Coking Works to be reopened. What about northern cities like Manchester which are going through dramatic changes and improvements. What about some places in North Yorkshire, outskirts of Doncaster, Derbyshire and even some of our own local constituencies which have a average wealth and income rivalling or even more than some parts of the southeast. Equally, there are plenty places south of Watford Gap and even in London itself which are very much down to earth working class areas with people on modest means. It's not all streets paved with gold. Go take a look around some parts of Essex, Norfolk, the South coast, Cornwall. They face just as many challenges, adjustments and developments as the supposed industrial ghost towns in the North. You can't just dismiss statistics. Just because the rate fluctuates doesn't mean things are going backwards. Even if there are discrepancies (which I'll ever going to go away no matter what system you bring in), it doesn't detract from the overall fact that a majority of the population ARE living longer. The majority of the next generation ARE starting work several years later than predecessors. There has been barely a handful of changes to the state pension age throughout history. At the time of the post war years, the average life expectancy for males was 66 and female 71. On present day numbers it's now at 78 for males and 82 for females. An increase over time average to 11 to 12 years extra life and you seriously think there is justified outrage of extending retirement age by a couple extra years away from the level set back in the 1940s. It's obvious things have to change.

Blimey, talk about putting something down before I even gets proper chance to get going. There really does seem to be collective on here desperate for this initiative to fail. Or perhaps I'm missing something. Has there been a wave of destruction all over the city centre caused by these vehicles? Are pedestrians getting flattened hourly by these vehicles? Has there been a chain of crashes happening by these supposed unskilled and unqualified drivers? I have been in the city for the past couple of days and can't say I have seen a pile of green Freebee buses upside down in the middle of Arundel Gate or smashed through the window of Atkinsons or bouncing up a kerb narrowly avoiding pedestrians... Are they really that much better or worse than any other bus driver navigating around a busy city?

But statistically a large majority of people are - in many cases 10-15 years longer than their predecessors. Furthermore, as the generations have evolved the next batch of pensioners will include vast numbers of people who started their working life much later. A generation of pensioners won't didn't leave school until at least 18 the continued in full-time education to their early twenties meaning they did not start of their working life until at least 5 or so years later than the previous generation. A generation of pensioners whom the majority will not have worked down a mine or 14 hours a day in some factory works filling their lungs with with various diseases, crippling their bones and going deaf. Many of those next generation will have been sat behind a desk or operating machinery at the touch of a button or tapping away on a computer or working from home or utilising the advancing technology. You are always banging on about 'fairness and equality'. So therefore, isn't it perfectly fair to expect a retirement age to be increased for people who are both living much longer and starting their careers much later than their predecessors. Pretty basic logic if you asked me. We cannot leave things static continually funding increasing age of pensioners who've spent less years paying to the system but living dramatically longer lies after retirement. Something has to give.

Nothing to stop the owners moving into the new developments if they wanted to. However, given Chubbys closed in 2020 and the owner's plan to reopen at a different location has come to nothing 4 years on, I suspect they simply decided to take the money and move on. An institution it may have been at the time, and I was certainly not a stranger frequenting it on a night out - but ultimately times change. Tastes change and there's plenty of the other places to sufficiently satisfy the drunk hungry crowd.

Probably taken them off Angela Rayner. She's been quite a master of skirting around subjects recently too.