Tony

Just remember that the USA was founded by all the nutcases that we didn't want here.

I'm not defending anything. I'm merely being analytical about this and am neither a fan or hater of either Johnson or Dacre. I'm saying that Dacre would appear to be a decent candidate to chair OFCOM and that poachers make good gamekeepers. I also happened to point out that the DCMS Committee chair who you cited as his critic could equally be said to be guilty of the things you accuse Dacre of, except that he's got some actual power in making Laws. Don't read things in which aren't there. Please feel free to reply with something of substance instead of what you think may be contradictions in what I think, which I must point out I am best placed to know, not you.

That's pretty much everyone, more or less, isn't it? Since you're a decent human being I don't believe for a moment that you think that anyone needs to get used to criminal gangs putting the lives of their victims at stake in La Manche. Come on pal, at least make an argument that holds a little water instead of parroting the arguments that were lost in 2016.

The problem with elections is that they tell you who's satisfied with who. How's the Labour revival going after half a century?

Loob, you brought up the Dublin Agreement. I merely stated that, if we're discussing it, that France wasn't keeping its end up. Britain isn't party to it any more, get used to it.

You could have another go if you like, perhaps building up to a point instead of a half-baked and not very funny insult. I'd been ignoring you, like most everyone else, but I'm having a sausage sandwich and you caught me at a weak moment. But please, go ahead and reply with something of substance that's worth a response. Precisely.

@carbuncle , yet again you present an argument that's not even mental gymnastics, it's flexible but not remotely agile.

"5,670 transfers" Currently a month's worth of dinghy's put-putting across the Channel from France. /anotherinconvenientfact

If you read my scribbles again you will see that I apply the same low standards to everyone. Correction, I applied your low standards to everyone.

Mate, all you are doing is highlighting that Johnson is a winner and Rayner is a loser.

The people who make the Law are subject to it just like the rest of us. Grown ups understand that moralistic posturing has no place post hoc unless it is to adjust the Law that affects us all. Seriously, if you want representatives who are representative we have to accept that they are subject to the same predilections as everyone else. If you don't like what they do you need to get the Law changed. They can't be just like us but treated differently. All these issues arise BECAUSE we expect them to abide by different rules to ourselves.

Didn't you get the memo? Nobody MP has time to do anything else apart from being an MP. Unless the other things are union work, doctoring, nursing, food banking, charity committees, fact finding in Palestine / Cuba / Venezuela, etc, etc. All those things can be done while being an MP, but not being a lawyer, banker, company director, moustachioed evil villain preparing to take over the World, etc, etc.

Having just had a quick Google of said Mr Knight's thoughts on things, he wouldn't' pass your fit and proper test to chair the DCMS committee either. At some point we have to be grown up about these things and accept that these roles are filled within pretty strict parameters with board, panels, executives, as well as the day to day officials who actually keep things going. The role of a chair isn't to ensure that decisions are doled out according to their own opinions otherwise Julian Knight wouldn't be a fit and proper person to chair the DCMS Committee. I've no particular axe to grind to wit Dacre, his journalism style certainly isn't to my taste. We can give him credit for understanding audiences, effective campaigning and understanding the business in general. I'd just like to see us approach things like adults instead of having to reduce everything to the margins of party politics.

Not at all @altus, I just told you what I thought, not what conclusions I had drawn after extensive investigation. It's the prerogative of an internet forum to be able to throw out an idle thought and wait for loads of people to shout you down as some kind of Nazi sympathiser after having consulted Google to check what they should themselves think. Seems to me that if the favourite for DG of the BBC was a former Labour MP and culture minister, then Dacre is quite a vanilla offering, not having actually served politically. And, as I said, poachers make very good gamekeepers. Why do you think he shouldn't?

@Mister M Dacre seems very well qualified for such a role, knowing the inner workings of the media business. Poachers make very good gamekeepers.

You cynic!

Notably France isn't implementing the Dublin Agreement by moving migrants back to the country of origin, say to Greece, Italy or Spain. They are migrating from France, not from, say, Eritrea Sudan, Iran. Truth is that not being party to the Dublin Agreement also makes it much easier for the UK to move migrants for offshore processing, say to Rwanda. The journey is much harder for trafficking gangs to sell to the poor saps who fall victim, when migrants end nearer to where they started than the place they wanted to be, or on the other side of the world if the Papua New Guinea were employed. But no you lot crack on, it's Brexit, not a line of Home Secretaries who have been unable to fully get to grips with the problem. Anyway, that's all from me. I just thought I'd pop in to see if the Continuity Remain Hive Mind was as feverish as ever and I wasn't disappointed.

I'm even more curious which party he represents because the only Keith Brown MP that I can recall is in the SNP. I think somebody might have had their leg lifted.

@Mr Bloke indeed you have and I hope that you'll never think of wearing trainers unless you are actually taking part or training for competitive sport or training. I hope we now agree that the 'cyclists in lycra' argument is very, very silly indeed. 👍

Are you wearing trainers?

How do you feel about people wearing football kit to play football?

Mel, I'm not even going to read your link. The bottom line is that the "From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free" is an anti-Semitic chant that quite simply calls for the total annihilation of the world's only Jewish state, re-established to provide safety from the annihilation of Jews from the planet. Mull that over please. You may or may not accept it, but that is the fact of the matter. You yourself are on the cusp of committing the same sin as the anti-Semites doing the chanting and their cheerleaders in the alternative communist press. You're a good bloke so rather than us falling out perhaps you could do me the favour of taking a few days to have a good think about it before leaping in now to try to prove me wrong.

Yea, it's antisemitism. Here's why. The Novara Media commentator in your video seems to avoid talking about the anti-Semitic chanting. Wonder why.

@sibon the dynamics of traffic are indeed a fascinating topic. For instance, yesterday, uncharacteristically for me, I drove 408 miles, with 8 hrs 5 mins at the wheel - you can do that maths. Before I set off, Google Maps gave me a time . You probably find the same as me, that their times are spookily accurate since they have billions / trillions / googles(!) of historic and live data points and the processing power to crunch them into a mind-bendingly simple answer for simple drivers. Google obviously assumes a maximum speed of 70mph but you might assume I went a little faster sometimes, which might have been quite a lot of the time when travelling outside of rush hours. Over the eight hours and 408 miles I saved a mere 6 minutes against the estimate. Speed really isn't worth the damage it does to everything except egos. It's because you go faster and there are fewer accidents. It's also due to pollution levels but that's probably not going to convince you of anything so just be happy that a 60mph speed limit means that the traffic moves more quickly and safely. The same goes for 20mph limits in urban areas. You go faster.

Truth be told sibon, I'd be reasonably happy for all urban and suburban dual carriageways to have a 20mph limit too. I've seen modelling in the past that DCs could be reduced to single carriageways, which would then allows lots of space to green up with proper pedestrian and cycle lanes along the most direct routes. The idea that journeys are noticeably longer with lower speed limits is an idea that lives in the head, not on the road.