@@arru23the thing is we actually did know that Iraq had WMD as Sadam Hussein had used them on his own people and during the war with Iran. What we didn’t know for sure in 2003 was whether he still did, but the betting/view of intelligence at the time was that he did. I do agree Iraq was a policy disaster for Blair, but for that he’d have easily romped home with another 100+ seat majority, as even in 2005 the Tories still couldn’t break the 200 seat mark, and likely he’d have been able to serve a full third term and run for a fourth and even with the financial crisis I believe Blair would still have won a majority, albeit probably very small, when you look at the actual outcome in 2010.
Rare honesty from a politician. You just know Sunak would somehow mention that they're doing a lot for peoples' energy bills and something about inflation being down
If Blair actually followed up on this then I'd say this is a perfect response. Humans are humans, they don't know every single thing that's going on, and a lot of knowledge comes down to at least one person knowing it, and others having a vague idea about who to ask. The fact that he openly said "I don't know, I'll get back to you" is so unlike the majority of politicians tripping over words trying to make a semi-coherent response made up of bullshit anyway because they, in fact, don't know.
If an MP or a Peer does not know the answer to a question, they say they “will write letters” (www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/will-write-letters/ ), common for complex ministerial questions, so I imagine that Blair would’ve written to him, as is usual practice, however I have gone through hansard and the deposited papers database and I can find no record of any response let alone this question even being asked, which makes the entire affair quite obscure (this is likely as this would’ve been asking during the period when hansard and other services were being digitalised and whatnot)
It was actually later found out that the member mistakenly thought "PM Questions" meant "Pet Memorial Questions", which is where the confusion came from.
@@vidurbutalia2130Most people engage in politics by being better or worse off and having someone to blame for it, that’s the definition of democracy. It’s not false nostalgia if they were better off then and therefore associate his leadership with better times.
@@dominicchallis2928 okay then, it's blissfully ignorant and self-obsessed nostalgia. Britian was the second biggest economy in the world, woohoo. On the other hand, our nation committed warcrimes on a massive scale, playing no small part in causing the migration crisis which the present government is using as a scapegoat for all the shit that's gone wrong.
It's got nothing to do with whether the member represented his constituents. It was a question regarding regulation effecting one small business in the members constituency. Blair, who evidently didn't have knowledge of the specific situation chose to simply say he didn't know, instead of coming up with some useless line about government policy or lie or deny the situation, and instead clarified that he would have to get back to the member after PMQ's once he could be given the salient facts. It's maybe not that obscure a question but it's a far better response than the last few PM's have given when asked question they have no real answer to.
Andrew Turner never once represented the Isle of Wight constituents. The bumbling idiot was finally ushered out after he made some pro religion anti gay remarks. He did like tigers though
Because; 1 clearly he’s asking a question the PM can’t answer 2 PMQs isn’t the only place you can represent constituents- MPs have other ways of representing constituents to get answers needed (ask the relevant minister, write a letter to the appropriate department etc).
Let's stop with the 'back when the biggest problem' nonsense. In the 90's we were still dealing with the after effects of the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was bombings in the UK on a weekly basis with the troubles, and the UK was recovering from a crippling recession. It's very easy to wear rose colored glasses.
@@fryliver4953 At the time when this question was asked, the Good friday agreement had been in place for a few years. Also, it was before the Iraq war. So it was actually a time when things looked good.
Agreed. History will show him in a good light notwithstanding the Iraq matter. No UK prime minister would have been able to resist the pressure applied by the US at that time. Not even Thatcher or Churchill.
@@deargdoom8743 Harold Wilson managed to withstand the pressure from Lyndon Johnson to take British troops into Vietnam in 1966. If you are a statesman (which Blair wasn't) then you just have to think of the right words - something like " Whilst I respect your wish for us to join you in this endeavour I don't think that what you are suggesting is something that I wish my country to be associated with and I fear I cannot support you in this matter". Then you have to withstand the threat and bluster - what are they going to do to you ? (as the leader of their regular and foremost ally at the time), the second world war is well and truly over - would they risk being seen as bullying their allies, just for disagreeing with them? I think not. We need politicians with a backbone, not ones who roll over and have their tummies tickled and are prepared to lie on their dysfunctional friend's behalf! Also I have it on some authority that Blair agreed to support George Dubya in the summer of 2002, long before parliament had agreed to do this and without proof of WMDs - Blair wasn't even a democrat. Also, I believe he should be on trial for war crimes, as many others have opined. In addition, Thatcher and Churchill are not paragons of virtue or even strength (though Churchil did show a lot of fortitude in the second world war , but was wrong about just about everything else for the rest of his career, and his actions in 1943 towards Bengal were a dreadful stain on the already inglorious phenomenon of British Imperialism); only people who have been fooled believe that. I'll leave that there, as that's a long and complex subject, but I will not allow your wild and untruthful claims to stand unchallenged.
It's ok not knowing something. But how can they laugh like they do at businesses when it's a business struggling. They laugh at literally everything in that place.
Pet cemeteries have to be inspected to ensure that the water table is not being polluted. One can only think that this stupid MP would like to see an outbreak of Typhoid!!!
Oh god, nostalgia for a man who dragged us into 2 illegal wars on what the head of MI6 told him were lies at the cost of a million lives. I'd rather Mr. Johnson, TBF.
Tony Blair was an absolute master of the despatch box. A lesser performer could have recited that answer word for word and it wouldn’t have worked an iota as well
Didn't the governments of the world spend two years randomly opening and closing their respective countries, print "free" money, and drive up inflation?
Just goes to show the contempt politicians have for the people. The elected representative raises an important issue from his consituents, and they all laugh and jeer, while the PM dismisses it out of hand.
No, the representative asks an incredibly obscure question which the PM had no chance of knowing the answer to. Representing his constituents and their problem is fine, but the PM was not the right person to be asking about on this issue.
Its a good example of how so many random pointless regulations suppress business, what sort of massive problem was being created by the existence of Pet cemeteries that required them to create such a regulation without thinking about the wider impact on peoples businesses or their freedoms? This rather minor example does speak to the larger issue the MP was raising of EU regulations over-reaching and interfering with negatively with peoples lives and business. The derision that Blair responded with to the surface level problem of some small pet cemetery business on the Isle of Wight reminds me exactly of the reaction people have to more recent examples of vast overreaching EU regulation such as "bendy bananas." People liked to make fun of the surface level example while ignoring the wider issue of all these pointless laws over trivial ""problems"" that still costing people money and pointlessly making life harder and more restrictive. This hand wavy attitude directly helped lead to the UK leaving the EU. "AH BUT HE SOUNDED SO COOL WITH HOW HE IGNORED THE ISSUE AND I LUAGHED ISNT BLAIR GREAT?!"
The Tory MP said that only 4-5 pets per year were buried on the IoW. So even if the firm has a 100% market share, I think the relevant question is how does this firm stay in business anyway? How viable a business is it that a £2k per year charge would sink them?
Firstly the question was asked by a tory & they are known to LIE quite often, especially about the EU. As shown by the whole bendy bananas & straight cucumbers myths. So i wouldn't take this mp's figures as proof of ANYTHING. Second, the answer "I don't know, I'll get back to you" is perfectly valid when it is followed up. The current media circus of always needing to have an answer & an opinion about something is utterly horrid & stifles proper thought. But even if we do take his question at face value(I DON'T!) & Blair needed to have an answer at his fingertips,(HE DIDN'T!) it probably would have been something along the lines of: there's EU regulation to keep our air, waterways & soil clean. If we pump too much shyte into the rivers & lakes without treating that sewage because it's cheaper for the shareholders of the water companies, our bivalves that filter that shyte water aren't fit for processing into food fit for human consumption, because the EU actually cares about the quality of the food that is eaten by citizens. In the same vein just burying the deceased willy-nilly somewhere in a field is bad, because the "juices" of the dead can leach into streams & wells. Remember how the Brontë sisters died. I do not know the reason that this pet cemetery has run afoul of this, i will look into it & get back to you. But then again, you moan about eek "foreign" EU regulation, that actually wasn't foreign, because the UK was a BIG player & drafted most of those rules, which made trade EASIER. It's way simpler to make things specified to one rule for the whole EU, than to have to remember the rules of EACH & EVERY INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY, which is why so many small & medium businesses have gone under since brexit...
@@homosexualpanic no, it was about 20 years before him. The EU had rules dictating the size and shape of fruit and the ones not compliant with this absurd rule had to be thrown out as wastage. THAT’s the kind of b*llshit the people were so fed up with.
@bjvtyy >The invasion of Iraq was neither in self-defense against armed attack nor sanctioned by UN Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force by member states and thus constituted the crime of war of aggression, according to the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in Geneva. >In September 2004, then-United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated, "I have indicated that it is not in accordance with the UN charter. From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal".
@bjvtyy You are the one disagreeing with the jurists on the matter. Both Iraq and the invading coalition can be in violation of international law, in the same way that e.g. North Korea's nuclear programme being illegal does nothing to legitimise a British invasion of it...
God forbid new labour get into power, imagine what that would be like. Sustained economic growth, competent government, a working social care system, an NHS that isn't perpetually on the brink of collapse, no sewerage being dumped into the sea and rivers, no home secretaries who call homelessness a choice and stoke racial tension to suit their own political ends, no mini budgets which singlehandedly plunge the pound and cost 30 billion in the space of a couple days, now that would be a truly terrifying state of affairs, a good thing we as a country never had anything like that in the past. Thankfully we can all appreciate the brilliant governments we have had over the last ten years for cleaning the Great off Britain and doing their utmost to saw the united off the United Kingdom.
I quite enjoyed the librarys, sports clubs and other facilities Labour built in local communities. Was a shame Tory austerity closed so many. But then again they did tell us that it had to happen due to the financial crash, because the financial crash had nothing to do with banks and big business, no it was the fault of all those labour libraries
0:50 - "The answer is, I don't know"
Shows how self-assured Blair was, most modern politicians would try to embarrassingly bluster.
Blair’s timing of his response was perfect .
@jesusbermudez6775shame he was so self assured about WMD
@@arru23Shame you’re a broken record stuck in 2003.
@@arru23the thing is we actually did know that Iraq had WMD as Sadam Hussein had used them on his own people and during the war with Iran. What we didn’t know for sure in 2003 was whether he still did, but the betting/view of intelligence at the time was that he did. I do agree Iraq was a policy disaster for Blair, but for that he’d have easily romped home with another 100+ seat majority, as even in 2005 the Tories still couldn’t break the 200 seat mark, and likely he’d have been able to serve a full third term and run for a fourth and even with the financial crisis I believe Blair would still have won a majority, albeit probably very small, when you look at the actual outcome in 2010.
Because now it would be shared very widely and be spun into a negative, when actually it is a very good thing to be able to admit.
Rare honesty from a politician. You just know Sunak would somehow mention that they're doing a lot for peoples' energy bills and something about inflation being down
Sunak would also have a plan. Don't forget the plan.
Oh, and labour tax rises. Don't forget the 2000 pounds in tax rises.
@@sepandsiassi6352 And the independent tax analysis, that isn't independent and a tax analysis.
@@glyn6170 Plan for the FUTURE, I suppose?
If Blair actually followed up on this then I'd say this is a perfect response. Humans are humans, they don't know every single thing that's going on, and a lot of knowledge comes down to at least one person knowing it, and others having a vague idea about who to ask.
The fact that he openly said "I don't know, I'll get back to you" is so unlike the majority of politicians tripping over words trying to make a semi-coherent response made up of bullshit anyway because they, in fact, don't know.
If an MP or a Peer does not know the answer to a question, they say they “will write letters” (www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/will-write-letters/ ), common for complex ministerial questions, so I imagine that Blair would’ve written to him, as is usual practice, however I have gone through hansard and the deposited papers database and I can find no record of any response let alone this question even being asked, which makes the entire affair quite obscure (this is likely as this would’ve been asking during the period when hansard and other services were being digitalised and whatnot)
yes your right, at least he had the guts to jump when Bush said jump boy
At 0:30 someone (very sarcastically) shouts "speak up for England!" 😆
it's 2024 and thankfully Pets at Rest are still in business.
Blair is like: I don't bloody know what you're talking about
It was actually later found out that the member mistakenly thought "PM Questions" meant "Pet Memorial Questions", which is where the confusion came from.
Refreshing honesty. For all his faults, Blair was way better than the shower of shit we have to deal with now.
He committed warcrimes
@@sumomanifyshh, let people who don’t understand politics bask in false nostalgia
@@vidurbutalia2130Most people engage in politics by being better or worse off and having someone to blame for it, that’s the definition of democracy. It’s not false nostalgia if they were better off then and therefore associate his leadership with better times.
@@dominicchallis2928 okay then, it's blissfully ignorant and self-obsessed nostalgia. Britian was the second biggest economy in the world, woohoo. On the other hand, our nation committed warcrimes on a massive scale, playing no small part in causing the migration crisis which the present government is using as a scapegoat for all the shit that's gone wrong.
@@monkeymox2544 That’s more like it.
That's what I want to hear. MPs are expected to know everything and it's just not possible.
I don't see what is so ridiculous about a government member actually representing his constituents.
It's got nothing to do with whether the member represented his constituents. It was a question regarding regulation effecting one small business in the members constituency. Blair, who evidently didn't have knowledge of the specific situation chose to simply say he didn't know, instead of coming up with some useless line about government policy or lie or deny the situation, and instead clarified that he would have to get back to the member after PMQ's once he could be given the salient facts. It's maybe not that obscure a question but it's a far better response than the last few PM's have given when asked question they have no real answer to.
Andrew Turner never once represented the Isle of Wight constituents. The bumbling idiot was finally ushered out after he made some pro religion anti gay remarks. He did like tigers though
@@kingstannisbaratheon7974 Wasn't criticising Blair's response, I was responding to the implications in the comments section and the video title.
Obscure doesn't mean ridiculous
Because;
1 clearly he’s asking a question the PM can’t answer
2 PMQs isn’t the only place you can represent constituents- MPs have other ways of representing constituents to get answers needed (ask the relevant minister, write a letter to the appropriate department etc).
Jack Nicholson as Tony Blair at 0:53.
back when the biggest problem with the country was a pet company being in trouble
Let's stop with the 'back when the biggest problem' nonsense. In the 90's we were still dealing with the after effects of the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was bombings in the UK on a weekly basis with the troubles, and the UK was recovering from a crippling recession. It's very easy to wear rose colored glasses.
@@anthonydpearson The Troubles weren't when Blair was PM
Yes that, not illegal wars in Iraq or something like that.
@@fryliver4953 At the time when this question was asked, the Good friday agreement had been in place for a few years. Also, it was before the Iraq war. So it was actually a time when things looked good.
@@finnharris6779 iraq war did not affect us, if anything it grew the economy
Stop the Boats! - pretty much the answer to any PMQ these days
Well they are still in business 2023
Pets at rest is still running!
Got to love how Blair dealt with that because of how utterly random that PMQ was. Pet cemetary? I mean, WTF lol...
Think he was referring to the £2000 tax for burying 5 animals a year
Stephen king might have an opinion on it I suppose.
What's he laughing at? It's a big deal for someone. Why would a PM mock them?
He also ‘didn’t know’ that Iraq DIDN’T have WMDs. Oh, that’s right, he DID.
I guess it's the aggressive tone of the question over an incredibly specific local issue he couldn't possibly have any knowledge of
Best PM we ever had
Boris? May?
@@MichaelJ44 Hahahahahahahahaha!
Atlee?
Agreed. History will show him in a good light notwithstanding the Iraq matter. No UK prime minister would have been able to resist the pressure applied by the US at that time. Not even Thatcher or Churchill.
@@deargdoom8743 Harold Wilson managed to withstand the pressure from Lyndon Johnson to take British troops into Vietnam in 1966. If you are a statesman (which Blair wasn't) then you just have to think of the right words - something like " Whilst I respect your wish for us to join you in this endeavour I don't think that what you are suggesting is something that I wish my country to be associated with and I fear I cannot support you in this matter". Then you have to withstand the threat and bluster - what are they going to do to you ? (as the leader of their regular and foremost ally at the time), the second world war is well and truly over - would they risk being seen as bullying their allies, just for disagreeing with them? I think not. We need politicians with a backbone, not ones who roll over and have their tummies tickled and are prepared to lie on their dysfunctional friend's behalf! Also I have it on some authority that Blair agreed to support George Dubya in the summer of 2002, long before parliament had agreed to do this and without proof of WMDs - Blair wasn't even a democrat. Also, I believe he should be on trial for war crimes, as many others have opined.
In addition, Thatcher and Churchill are not paragons of virtue or even strength (though Churchil did show a lot of fortitude in the second world war , but was wrong about just about everything else for the rest of his career, and his actions in 1943 towards Bengal were a dreadful stain on the already inglorious phenomenon of British Imperialism); only people who have been fooled believe that. I'll leave that there, as that's a long and complex subject, but I will not allow your wild and untruthful claims to stand unchallenged.
I honestly love him so much
including iraq, or?
If it weren't for Iraq, Blair would be remembered as the greatest peace-time PM in the UK's history.
@@rorynator7567 i'm a lib dem lol, the party I support gained traction by essentially offering "blair, but without iraq"
You love a convicted sex offender?
The answer is perfectly delivered. It’s like he’s talking to a child
Ironically that's how the Tories have had such longevity recently - the Dead Cat Strategy
It's ok not knowing something. But how can they laugh like they do at businesses when it's a business struggling. They laugh at literally everything in that place.
More serious point: he and his ilk really didn't know or care what EU directives we were forced to implement.
Absolutely goated PM
"obscure question" PM knows the PMQs questions before hand lmao
That's why he's the master! 😅
weapons of mass destruction,PM
The greatest.
That question is actually why we play our mp's and its not a joke to pet owners
Raised a question from his constituents? How dare he
"The answer is I don't know" had slight Michael Caine vibes.
Did he ever get back to him?
Good god someone's found an EU law they might have voted Brexit to remove.
Such an EU rule requiring such inspections help to prevent out breaks of Disease from polluted water
People acting like Blair was being modest/honest here.
In reality he’s still playing politics with this answer.
Very astute of you - the politician was playing politics all along!
Which year of his tenue was this?
I can see Charles Kennedy on the opposition front bench and also Angus McNeil a few rows behind him, so 2005, maybe 2006
@user-gu1un7pb7k Ah see well I was a kid then but at least he actually said 'I don't no' 😂 Unlike MPs now
@@jakefessi8045 It’s more how he delivered the line. Without the sarcasm and humour, he could have looked bad. He was simply a natural politician.
Pet cemeteries have to be inspected to ensure that the water table is not being polluted. One can only think that this stupid MP would like to see an outbreak of Typhoid!!!
EU > Brexit
Tf was tha question 😂
Expenses & anti gay.
Oh god, nostalgia for a man who dragged us into 2 illegal wars on what the head of MI6 told him were lies at the cost of a million lives. I'd rather Mr. Johnson, TBF.
ah so hilarious, he was really good
Tony Blair was an absolute master of the despatch box. A lesser performer could have recited that answer word for word and it wouldn’t have worked an iota as well
Cheshire cat grin.
Phoney the Bliar!
RIP Pets At Rest 🐈 ⚰️🪦 😢
Just looked them up, seems like they're still in business 🤷♂
0:55 why does he look like Jack Nicholson
It’s absolutely hilarious that nonsense like this led us to brexit which has absolutely crippled the economy
If you don't understand, probably best not to comment.
Didn't the governments of the world spend two years randomly opening and closing their respective countries, print "free" money, and drive up inflation?
@@darrenowen3338 the irony
You too, rather than just a snide comment.@@TC8787-yq7og
Whatever the answer was, it was not Brexit. Or invading Iraq. Catastophes from both sides of the house
It sounds funny, but if you listen to the substance...they're charging someone 2,600 pounds per year in fees to bury a few dogs?
Pet at rest company still in business United Kingdom
Just goes to show the contempt politicians have for the people. The elected representative raises an important issue from his consituents, and they all laugh and jeer, while the PM dismisses it out of hand.
No, the representative asks an incredibly obscure question which the PM had no chance of knowing the answer to. Representing his constituents and their problem is fine, but the PM was not the right person to be asking about on this issue.
Its a good example of how so many random pointless regulations suppress business, what sort of massive problem was being created by the existence of Pet cemeteries that required them to create such a regulation without thinking about the wider impact on peoples businesses or their freedoms?
This rather minor example does speak to the larger issue the MP was raising of EU regulations over-reaching and interfering with negatively with peoples lives and business.
The derision that Blair responded with to the surface level problem of some small pet cemetery business on the Isle of Wight reminds me exactly of the reaction people have to more recent examples of vast overreaching EU regulation such as "bendy bananas."
People liked to make fun of the surface level example while ignoring the wider issue of all these pointless laws over trivial ""problems"" that still costing people money and pointlessly making life harder and more restrictive.
This hand wavy attitude directly helped lead to the UK leaving the EU. "AH BUT HE SOUNDED SO COOL WITH HOW HE IGNORED THE ISSUE AND I LUAGHED ISNT BLAIR GREAT?!"
The Tory MP said that only 4-5 pets per year were buried on the IoW.
So even if the firm has a 100% market share, I think the relevant question is how does this firm stay in business anyway? How viable a business is it that a £2k per year charge would sink them?
Firstly the question was asked by a tory & they are known to LIE quite often, especially about the EU. As shown by the whole bendy bananas & straight cucumbers myths. So i wouldn't take this mp's figures as proof of ANYTHING.
Second, the answer "I don't know, I'll get back to you" is perfectly valid when it is followed up. The current media circus of always needing to have an answer & an opinion about something is utterly horrid & stifles proper thought.
But even if we do take his question at face value(I DON'T!) & Blair needed to have an answer at his fingertips,(HE DIDN'T!) it probably would have been something along the lines of:
there's EU regulation to keep our air, waterways & soil clean.
If we pump too much shyte into the rivers & lakes without treating that sewage because it's cheaper for the shareholders of the water companies, our bivalves that filter that shyte water aren't fit for processing into food fit for human consumption, because the EU actually cares about the quality of the food that is eaten by citizens.
In the same vein just burying the deceased willy-nilly somewhere in a field is bad, because the "juices" of the dead can leach into streams & wells. Remember how the Brontë sisters died.
I do not know the reason that this pet cemetery has run afoul of this, i will look into it & get back to you.
But then again, you moan about eek "foreign" EU regulation, that actually wasn't foreign, because the UK was a BIG player & drafted most of those rules, which made trade EASIER. It's way simpler to make things specified to one rule for the whole EU, than to have to remember the rules of EACH & EVERY INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY, which is why so many small & medium businesses have gone under since brexit...
Bendy bananas? I thought that was all bullshit made up by BoJo
@@homosexualpanic no, it was about 20 years before him. The EU had rules dictating the size and shape of fruit and the ones not compliant with this absurd rule had to be thrown out as wastage. THAT’s the kind of b*llshit the people were so fed up with.
Blair was brilliant.
Criminal Blair....The bomber of Baghdad.
Should be in jail for war crimes
Oh bore off and sing a different tune!
@bjvtyy
>The invasion of Iraq was neither in self-defense against armed attack nor sanctioned by UN Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force by member states and thus constituted the crime of war of aggression, according to the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in Geneva.
>In September 2004, then-United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated, "I have indicated that it is not in accordance with the UN charter. From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal".
@bjvtyy You are the one disagreeing with the jurists on the matter. Both Iraq and the invading coalition can be in violation of international law, in the same way that e.g. North Korea's nuclear programme being illegal does nothing to legitimise a British invasion of it...
@@petra2578 Get over it mate. We used to own 25% of the world, 1 war is a fly in the ointment.
It's not an obscure question at all
Your mom is an obscure question
@@tyronebiggums8660 k, interesting you got a like seconds after you posted your comment. Almost like you did it yourself
Why can't I see your comment anymore Tyrone? Did you delete it?
@@eliwhaley4804 Is that Salisbury?
@@tyronebiggums8660 yup lol
20 years later turns out the answer was to leave the EU.
Its not an obscure question, blair like all, knows the question beforehand , its how the system works,
No he doesn't and no it's not
Some questions will be planted, especially those from marginal constituencies held by the government, but mostly they don't know the questions.
New labour ha ha. You'd be worse than the conservatives.
You benefit from the minimum wage which Labour introduced
Impossible.
God forbid new labour get into power, imagine what that would be like. Sustained economic growth, competent government, a working social care system, an NHS that isn't perpetually on the brink of collapse, no sewerage being dumped into the sea and rivers, no home secretaries who call homelessness a choice and stoke racial tension to suit their own political ends, no mini budgets which singlehandedly plunge the pound and cost 30 billion in the space of a couple days, now that would be a truly terrifying state of affairs, a good thing we as a country never had anything like that in the past. Thankfully we can all appreciate the brilliant governments we have had over the last ten years for cleaning the Great off Britain and doing their utmost to saw the united off the United Kingdom.
@@kingstannisbaratheon7974 up yours, you left wing, woke pathetic snowflake. Socialism is the answer, is it. Yawn yawn yawn
I quite enjoyed the librarys, sports clubs and other facilities Labour built in local communities. Was a shame Tory austerity closed so many. But then again they did tell us that it had to happen due to the financial crash, because the financial crash had nothing to do with banks and big business, no it was the fault of all those labour libraries