IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Is this our Richard Garvie?
MontyPython
post May 7 2015, 08:35 AM
Post #21


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 926
Joined: 16-June 12
Member No.: 8,755



QUOTE (nerc @ May 7 2015, 05:12 AM) *


That's him
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nerc
post May 7 2015, 11:53 AM
Post #22


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 148
Joined: 23-November 11
Member No.: 8,319



"a fit and proper person" to run events and raising funds for charities?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sherlock
post May 7 2015, 11:58 AM
Post #23


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 12-January 12
Member No.: 8,467



Cameron having more seats than any other single party seems a dead cert and has been for ages, amazed they got 7/1. When did they place the bet?

7/1 on an overall majority is a very bad deal, the odds are much longer than that - they'd need to win 326 seats and even 300-310 is looking very unlikely even taking 'shy tories' and tactical switchers into account. If they get 290 they could form another coalition although some senior Libdems (if that's not an oxymoron), like Lord Steel earlier today, are comjng out against that on the probably not unreasonable basis that it would be suicide for the party to do so.

Better tell us which bookmaker they used.


QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ May 2 2015, 10:37 PM) *
Sums Labour up really. ohmy.gif

I know someone who has had £5K at 7/1 on a Conservative Majority.

He may be right. When all's said and done and people are in the "PRIVACY" of casting a vote I'd be surprised if most of the "floaters"
don't settle on the most polished **** than that of a lot of other political party sh!t, The tories. blink.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sherlock
post May 7 2015, 12:00 PM
Post #24


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 12-January 12
Member No.: 8,467



For considerably more informed political betting comment, follow this guy on Twitter

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/596282955003207680
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post May 7 2015, 04:15 PM
Post #25


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



He was such a political person and seemed to have had a future in that profession. Now nobody will touch him with a bargepole. I wouldn't be surprised that we next here of him cleaning out toilets. That is after he gets a jail term (if he doesn't get a jail term). You never know, he might come back to Newbury as a Greens candidate. laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sherlock
post May 8 2015, 01:02 AM
Post #26


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 12-January 12
Member No.: 8,467



Well well, as I type Cameron could actually get a majority! We need to know a. who it was that placed a 7/1 bet on an overall majority so we can find out what he says next time and b. why he didn't get better odds than 7/1. Meanwhile, treble G&Ts all round!

QUOTE (Sherlock @ May 7 2015, 12:58 PM) *
Cameron having more seats than any other single party seems a dead cert and has been for ages, amazed they got 7/1. When did they place the bet?

7/1 on an overall majority is a very bad deal, the odds are much longer than that - they'd need to win 326 seats and even 300-310 is looking very unlikely even taking 'shy tories' and tactical switchers into account. If they get 290 they could form another coalition although some senior Libdems (if that's not an oxymoron), like Lord Steel earlier today, are comjng out against that on the probably not unreasonable basis that it would be suicide for the party to do so.

Better tell us which bookmaker they used.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post May 8 2015, 08:50 PM
Post #27


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



No luck at all.....
Result...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MontyPython
post May 8 2015, 09:18 PM
Post #28


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 926
Joined: 16-June 12
Member No.: 8,755



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ May 8 2015, 09:50 PM) *
No luck at all.....
Result...


Labour behind UKIP - that's the ticket.

Sorry that was a bit insensitive wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post May 9 2015, 08:03 AM
Post #29


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ May 8 2015, 09:50 PM) *
No luck at all.....
Result...
Looking at Twitter, there was genuine anger from the potential Labour voters in Wellingborough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post May 9 2015, 04:46 PM
Post #30


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (user23 @ May 9 2015, 09:03 AM) *
Looking at Twitter, there was genuine anger from the potential Labour voters in Wellingborough.


Even if all the labour voters voted UKIP the Conservative would still have won the seat. Would the potential labour voters who may have voted UKIP have voted Labour, the Conservative would still have won the seat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MontyPython
post May 9 2015, 06:33 PM
Post #31


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 926
Joined: 16-June 12
Member No.: 8,755



QUOTE (Exhausted @ May 9 2015, 05:46 PM) *
Even if all the labour voters voted UKIP the Conservative would still have won the seat. Would the potential labour voters who may have voted UKIP have voted Labour, the Conservative would still have won the seat.


You are probably correct that the Conservatives would have one anyway, but fail to take into account those would be Labour voters that abstained rather than vote for RG.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post May 9 2015, 07:18 PM
Post #32


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (MontyPython @ May 9 2015, 07:33 PM) *
You are probably correct that the Conservatives would have one anyway, but fail to take into account those would be Labour voters that abstained rather than vote for RG.


Would have needed 17,000 votes to get even close so still no favourable result.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post May 9 2015, 09:25 PM
Post #33


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,065
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



QUOTE (Sherlock @ May 7 2015, 12:58 PM) *
Cameron having more seats than any other single party seems a dead cert and has been for ages, amazed they got 7/1. When did they place the bet?

7/1 on an overall majority is a very bad deal, the odds are much longer than that - they'd need to win 326 seats and even 300-310 is looking very unlikely even taking 'shy tories' and tactical switchers into account. If they get 290 they could form another coalition although some senior Libdems (if that's not an oxymoron), like Lord Steel earlier today, are comjng out against that on the probably not unreasonable basis that it would be suicide for the party to do so.

Better tell us which bookmaker they used.


Seems like a few made a bob or two.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-el...l-election.html

I must say - I do fear what this means for GREAT Britain.

1. No Fiscal autonomy for Scotland but we'd better keep them happy. Here's another £10 Billion.
2. No proper vote on Europe but a "worded" question that makes people question the validity of the referendum rather than a straight in / out.
3. Every by-election being won by UKIP / Labour
4. The Tories going "Austerity" Mad.
5. A group of self centred egotistical Tories (only takes 10) to hold the Government to ransom.
6. The lack of a steadying hand (Clegg WAS a good deputy)
7. The Conservatives being destroyed at the next election (good time to get out Dave)

2018 General Election methinks. No 5 year term, Won't happen.....

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post May 10 2015, 01:04 PM
Post #34


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ May 9 2015, 10:25 PM) *
I must say - I do fear what this means for GREAT Britain.

1. No Fiscal autonomy for Scotland but we'd better keep them happy. Here's another £10 Billion.


I can't see what they can do apart give them limited fiscal autonomy. They will surely give Scotland the power to raise income to pay for the Scottish Assembly's expenditure - so health, education, welfare, police, pensions but not defence, foreign affairs.

Which might mean splitting budgets for these items UK wide - so the UK govt can levy taxes to pay for the UK expenditure and separate taxes for the 'local' expenditure.

This would do away with the Barnett formula and leave the SNP with the choice between high taxation or austerity - interesting to see how their support holds up if they bankrupt Scotland with their anti-austerity plans. Or how the English react to seeing Scotland thrive under a socialist programme. I guess the big row will be about oil revenues.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post May 10 2015, 04:17 PM
Post #35


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (blackdog @ May 10 2015, 02:04 PM) *
I can't see what they can do apart give them limited fiscal autonomy. They will surely give Scotland the power to raise income to pay for the Scottish Assembly's expenditure - so health, education, welfare, police, pensions but not defence, foreign affairs.

Which might mean splitting budgets for these items UK wide - so the UK govt can levy taxes to pay for the UK expenditure and separate taxes for the 'local' expenditure.

This would do away with the Barnett formula and leave the SNP with the choice between high taxation or austerity - interesting to see how their support holds up if they bankrupt Scotland with their anti-austerity plans. Or how the English react to seeing Scotland thrive under a socialist programme. I guess the big row will be about oil revenues.


I'd go with that Blackdog.

Try this for size. If we did the above for Scotland, Ulster, Wales and England we would have a federated country, under our monarch. In other words a free market. Would that give us an opportunity to ask others, particularly the old Empire the chance to join? It's probably far too late now!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post May 10 2015, 04:45 PM
Post #36


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (On the edge @ May 10 2015, 05:17 PM) *
I'd go with that Blackdog.

Try this for size. If we did the above for Scotland, Ulster, Wales and England we would have a federated country, under our monarch. In other words a free market. Would that give us an opportunity to ask others, particularly the old Empire the chance to join? It's probably far too late now!


On his programme this morning Andrew Marr pointed out a major problem with a federal system - the overwhelming economic strength of England. An English First Minister would be as or more powerful than the UK Prime Minister. He/she would certainly have a far bigger budget since the 'external' spend on defence, foreign affairs etc is only a fraction of 'internal' spend on welfare, education etc.

In many ways it would be a lot easier just to give Scotland independence - which might be what the SNP are banking on.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post May 10 2015, 06:06 PM
Post #37


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (blackdog @ May 10 2015, 05:45 PM) *
On his programme this morning Andrew Marr pointed out a major problem with a federal system - the overwhelming economic strength of England. An English First Minister would be as or more powerful than the UK Prime Minister. He/she would certainly have a far bigger budget since the 'external' spend on defence, foreign affairs etc is only a fraction of 'internal' spend on welfare, education etc.

In many ways it would be a lot easier just to give Scotland independence - which might be what the SNP are banking on.


There is doubtless something in that. After all, we managed to survive and thrive without Ireland.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
graham
post May 13 2015, 12:29 PM
Post #38


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 74
Joined: 19-May 09
Member No.: 80



Well Mr Garvie why didnt you use that closed bank account to pay people what you owe them ? like the people who put them selves out to help you at a fire work event ! This is the same Richard Garvie that got sacked from Tesco for being dishonist and causing stress to the people that worked under him regading payment for over time.

Some staff members wages were left short after Garvie failed to approve their overtime and claimed that he would add it on to the next months salary but some members never saw the extra money for the extra work they put in. I hope he gets sentanced because its what he deserved and then he can reflect on his sad little life and all the people he caused stress to and he might realise how he has acted .
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Exhausted
post May 13 2015, 05:08 PM
Post #39


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320



QUOTE (graham @ May 13 2015, 01:29 PM) *
Well Mr Garvie why didnt you use that closed bank account to pay people what you owe them ? like the people who put them selves out to help you at a fire work event ! This is the same Richard Garvie that got sacked from Tesco for being dishonist and causing stress to the people that worked under him regading payment for over time. Some staff members wages were left short after Garvie failed to approve their overtime and claimed that he would add it on to the next months salary but some members never saw the extra money for the extra work they put in. I hope he gets sentanced because its what he deserved and then he can reflect on his sad little life and all the people he caused stress to and he might realise how he has acted .


Strange how these things surface. I don't know how the firework display was funded but were people left out of pocket or just not thanked for their hard work.

As far as the Tesco story, is all that true or just an "I heard that......"




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post May 13 2015, 08:21 PM
Post #40


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (graham @ May 13 2015, 01:29 PM) *
Well Mr Garvie why didnt you use that closed bank account to pay people what you owe them ? like the people who put them selves out to help you at a fire work event ! This is the same Richard Garvie that got sacked from Tesco for being dishonist and causing stress to the people that worked under him regading payment for over time.

Some staff members wages were left short after Garvie failed to approve their overtime and claimed that he would add it on to the next months salary but some members never saw the extra money for the extra work they put in. I hope he gets sentanced because its what he deserved and then he can reflect on his sad little life and all the people he caused stress to and he might realise how he has acted .


Worth another look. If anyone has any remaining debt after then it's quite simple to use the small claims process in the County Court. Similarly, if Tesco staff haven't been paid properly, then its an internal issue and the normal processes would doubtless put matters right - no matter the deficiencies of individual managers.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th February 2020 - 07:55 PM