GB News - NEWS

116371638163916411643

Comments

  • John DoughJohn Dough Posts: 153,319
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    James2001 wrote: »
    Bunch of Worcestershire Reform councillors photographed with local neo-nazi group
    https://bsky.app/profile/reformexposed.bsky.social/post/3ma4rdr66rk2h

    ud817ay7y7ze.png
    9xxlkcfmp0mk.png

    Is that their Christmas card? :/
  • James2001James2001 Posts: 81,062
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Probably. Nothing better to celebrate the birth of a middle eastern jew than the 14 words.
  • jonmorrisjonmorris Posts: 23,874
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CLL Dodge wrote: »
    Clowney wrote: »
    Tanya1982 wrote: »
    Have we not lost the main purpose of this thread?

    No.

    He’s the most famous person on the roster. This is what he’s been up to. As relevant as the breakfast presenters hairstyle.

    The main purpose is stated in the title. All things GBNews related.

    How about discussing the stories talked about on GB News today. When I have listened they have been discussing whether there is a need for an emergency census that a think tank has proposed. The main argument seems to be that some towns (Middlesbrough and Preston) have seen their populations increase by 10% in recent years and they are not getting anywhere near the amount of funds to support local services. An emergency census would help prove their argument that they need more money from Central Government.

    Would an emergency census be welcome or would you like to wait until 2031?

    One of the stated aims of this census would be: "The unprecedented level of immigration-driven population growth which has taken place since the March 2021 England & Wales Census."

    You can see where GB News want to go with this.

    https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-case-for-a-2026-emergency-census-in-england/

    Yes, I think we can see why GB News wants to cover this story...
    Inserting denominational categories such as Catholic, Protestant, Sunni, and Shia for the Census question on religious affiliation.

    Reframing the question on national identity so respondents are given the opportunity to report the relative strength of their British and English identities.

    Removing the 2021 Census questions on gender self-identification and sexual orientation (which were first introduced in the last edition with limited success).

    Adding a new question on how long one has been living at their current home and where they lived before, to develop a richer understanding of internal migration.

    Encouraging the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to work more closely with private marketing firms, polling companies, and reputable civic associations in the delivery of the Census.

    And then they list the coverage they've had for the proposals..
    The launch of this report was covered by:

    The Daily Mail
    The Telegraph (1)
    The Telegraph (2)
    The Sun
    The Express
    GB News (1)
    GB News (2)
    GB News (3)
    LBC
    Times Radio
    The National
    International Business Times
    POLITICO’s London Playbook
  • Westy2Westy2 Posts: 16,868
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!

  • That BlokeThat Bloke Posts: 6,561
    Forum Member
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.
  • ClowneyClowney Posts: 31
    Forum Member
    That Bloke wrote: »
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.

    It's a very poor spectacle these days.
  • Mark CMark C Posts: 25,627
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That Bloke wrote: »
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.

    100% agree. PMQ is, and always has been really, a Punch and Judy show.
  • PaddyKPaddyK Posts: 10,589
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mark C wrote: »
    That Bloke wrote: »
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.

    100% agree. PMQ is, and always has been really, a Punch and Judy show.

    Especially when they first televised it back in 1989.
  • PaddyKPaddyK Posts: 10,589
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    edited 18/12/25 - 16:17 #41010
    https://x.com/RupaHuq/status/2001612179578196256?s=20

    Nigel Farage came out of the draw for a Parliamentary question today,apparently he was a no show,probably too busy helping his constituents I bet.
  • MGBC3MGBC3 Posts: 4,539
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Was PMQ’s any better before it was televised. I know it used to be 2 15 minute sessions a week
  • davelovesleedsdavelovesleeds Posts: 28,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 18/12/25 - 17:41 #41012
    PaddyK wrote: »
    https://x.com/RupaHuq/status/2001612179578196256?s=20

    Nigel Farage came out of the draw for a Parliamentary question today,apparently he was a no show,probably too busy helping his constituents I bet.


    He probably has as much genuine concern for farmers as he does for the constituents of Clacton
  • PaddyKPaddyK Posts: 10,589
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    PaddyK wrote: »
    https://x.com/RupaHuq/status/2001612179578196256?s=20

    Nigel Farage came out of the draw for a Parliamentary question today,apparently he was a no show,probably too busy helping his constituents I bet.


    He probably has as much genuine concern for framers as he does for the constituents of Clacton

    I wouldn’t imagine Clacton has a big farming community.
  • davelovesleedsdavelovesleeds Posts: 28,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 18/12/25 - 18:05 #41014
    MGBC3 wrote: »
    Was PMQ’s any better before it was televised. I know it used to be 2 15 minute sessions a week

    I would sometimes listen to it on the radio where maybe they were not playing it up as much but it was a long time ago and my memory has more important things to try and remember .

    The 2 x 15 sessions were televised, it was only under Tony Blair that it changed to its current format
  • davelovesleedsdavelovesleeds Posts: 28,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 18/12/25 - 17:43 #41015
    PaddyK wrote: »
    PaddyK wrote: »
    https://x.com/RupaHuq/status/2001612179578196256?s=20

    Nigel Farage came out of the draw for a Parliamentary question today,apparently he was a no show,probably too busy helping his constituents I bet.


    He probably has as much genuine concern for framers as he does for the constituents of Clacton

    I wouldn’t imagine Clacton has a big farming community.

    If there's not money in it for him he won't be interested one way or the other.
  • andydenyerandydenyer Posts: 10,508
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    edited 18/12/25 - 17:57 #41016
    Clowney wrote: »
    That Bloke wrote: »
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.

    It's a very poor spectacle these days.

    What do you mean 'these days'?
    PaddyK wrote: »
    Mark C wrote: »
    That Bloke wrote: »
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.

    100% agree. PMQ is, and always has been really, a Punch and Judy show.

    Especially when they first televised it back in 1989.

    Sounded just as bad when they started broadcasting the audio on radio a good 10 years or so before then.
    MGBC3 wrote: »
    Was PMQ’s any better before it was televised. I know it used to be 2 15 minute sessions a week

    No. It has always sounded like an unruly rabble.
  • PaddyKPaddyK Posts: 10,589
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    edited 18/12/25 - 18:17 #41017
    https://x.com/Nicomac_666/status/2000723517352841517?s=20

    Malone is an awful old fishwife, GB News deleted the entire show which contained her apology from YouTube
  • davelovesleedsdavelovesleeds Posts: 28,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    PaddyK wrote: »
    https://x.com/Nicomac_666/status/2000723517352841517?s=20

    Malone is an awful old fishwife, GB News deleted the entire show which contained her apology from YouTube

    By her own admission, she delivers comments, as a presenter on GB News, based on what she has seen on-line.

    She was even questioned about the validity of the claim yet repeated it, rather than doing some research, like any proper journalist or presenter would have done first anyway, she just repeated the same claim.
  • MadsocksMadsocks Posts: 3,995
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!

    I tell you what Reform will do if they get in......bring in The Purge.
  • MGBC3MGBC3 Posts: 4,539
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    andydenyer wrote: »
    Clowney wrote: »
    That Bloke wrote: »
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.

    It's a very poor spectacle these days.

    What do you mean 'these days'?
    PaddyK wrote: »
    Mark C wrote: »
    That Bloke wrote: »
    Westy2 wrote: »
    If Reform get in, they'll cancel Pmq's.

    They dont like scrutiny, plus he'll never be there anyway!
    PMQs doesn’t really provide any scrutiny, it’s just pantomime for the cameras. I think that PMQs sets the tone for a lot of political discourse generally because it’s what people think that parliament looks like.

    Nobody tunes in to watch a committee session on a non-party political issue where a lot of MPs, across all parties, do actually work together trying to do what they feel is best for the country, or meeting their constituents and writing letters on their behalf. That doesn’t fit the narrative of all MPs being a waste of space.

    100% agree. PMQ is, and always has been really, a Punch and Judy show.

    Especially when they first televised it back in 1989.

    Sounded just as bad when they started broadcasting the audio on radio a good 10 years or so before then.
    MGBC3 wrote: »
    Was PMQ’s any better before it was televised. I know it used to be 2 15 minute sessions a week

    No. It has always sounded like an unruly rabble.

    I do listen to PMQ’s most weeks and wonder if it sounds more like a farmyard with the constant noise of MP’s trying to interrupt each other for scoring tactical points.

    Mind that’s probably an insult to the animals in the farmyard
  • AndrewB1953AndrewB1953 Posts: 454
    Forum Member
    We seek him here,
    We seek him there,
    That Damn Farage,
    We seek him everywhere
  • davelovesleedsdavelovesleeds Posts: 28,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 19/12/25 - 10:01 #41022
    Is he in Clacton?
    Is he hell!
    He's only in places,
    That serve him well
  • JamesTheRedJamesTheRed Posts: 27,248
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 19/12/25 - 11:05 #41023
    I see Reform and GBNews are going heavy on the cancelled (postponed) local elections.

    Starmer is making a huge error here - I do believe now the only way to defeat reform currently is if they have proper scrutiny.

    Labour has lost the narrative on the reasons these elections have been postponed - the best thing they can do currently is let them go ahead.. let reform control some of these big councils.. let people see what a complete mess they make of it.
  • ClowneyClowney Posts: 31
    Forum Member
    I see Reform and GBNews are going heavy on the cancelled (postponed) local elections.

    Starmer is making a huge error here - I do believe now the only way to defeat reform currently is if they have proper scrutiny.

    Labour has lost the narrative on the reasons these elections have been postponed - the best thing they can do currently is let them go ahead.. let reform control some of these big councils.. let people see what a complete mess they make of it.

    Quite rightly so by GB News very undemocratic!
    Your point may end up being correct. Although I think any mess up of councils by Reform, would help the Tories more than Labour.
  • JamesTheRedJamesTheRed Posts: 27,248
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    edited 19/12/25 - 13:04 #41025
    Clowney wrote: »
    I see Reform and GBNews are going heavy on the cancelled (postponed) local elections.

    Starmer is making a huge error here - I do believe now the only way to defeat reform currently is if they have proper scrutiny.

    Labour has lost the narrative on the reasons these elections have been postponed - the best thing they can do currently is let them go ahead.. let reform control some of these big councils.. let people see what a complete mess they make of it.

    Quite rightly so by GB News very undemocratic!
    Your point may end up being correct. Although I think any mess up of councils by Reform, would help the Tories more than Labour.

    I don’t think Reform have a leg to stand on talking about democratic

    How was the leader elected?
    How many defections have happened without bi elections?
  • ClowneyClowney Posts: 31
    Forum Member
    edited 19/12/25 - 13:37 #41026
    Clowney wrote: »
    I see Reform and GBNews are going heavy on the cancelled (postponed) local elections.

    Starmer is making a huge error here - I do believe now the only way to defeat reform currently is if they have proper scrutiny.

    Labour has lost the narrative on the reasons these elections have been postponed - the best thing they can do currently is let them go ahead.. let reform control some of these big councils.. let people see what a complete mess they make of it.

    Quite rightly so by GB News very undemocratic!
    Your point may end up being correct. Although I think any mess up of councils by Reform, would help the Tories more than Labour.

    I don’t think Reform have a leg to stand on talking about democratic

    How was the leader elected?
    How many defections have happened without bi elections?

    Not the same thing. Reform members have the mechanism to force a change of leader. Not very often a bi election is called in recent times when a defection happens. e.g. Bury south should have been one then when Wakeford defected to Labour.
Sign In or Register to comment.