Lord Duckhunter

Brown is The Beatles of incompetent PM's, he is head and shoulders above any of the others. The pictures of him stalking Mrs Duffy outside her house have to be the most cringeworthy event in the history of the modern PM. He's quickly followed by 2 wets, Johnny Major, who managed to split the party by listening to fools like Hestletine, Clarke and Patten rather than the grass roots. And Grocer Heath, who lied and tricked us into a European Superstate. I fear that Cameron is heading in the same direction as those two, and would therefore like to see David Davis ride to the rescue, kick the sandal wearers out, call an election and sort Labour's mess out. cameron hasn't the balls to do it.

The political elite ahve decided that Europe is best for us, and that's the end of it. There will never be a vote on Europe as the Establishment know what is best and couldn't care less what the people say. We have been lied to over and over again regarding Europe. It was just a trading community, the various treaties did not constitute a fundamental change in our relationship, the Euro will not lead to greater intergration. Overe and over again the European people have been lied to. It's unbelievable that the Euro loons who wanted the Euro were wrong, completely and utterely wrong and yet because they were so wrong the only answer is to move nearer to their vision and away from the sensible approach, that the people who were right wanted all along. The people who want a Trading bloc (what we voted for) only, were right and, yet because they were right, we are moving nearer to the intergrated dream that the people who were wrong want. Sat around the dinner parties of Islington and Notting Hill, the Euro and more Eu meddling is a great idea. How very modern our leaders are, how sophisticated they are. What good European they all are.

And who do we thank for destroying the pensions of millions of hardworking low paid private workers, well none other than Mr G Brown. Despite being warned by Internal Treasury forecasts that changes in his first budget would "cause a shortfall in existing assets of up to £75 billion" and that "employers would have to contribute about an extra £10 billion a year for the next 10 to 15 years to get pension scheme funding back on track".He was also also advised that the worst effected victims would be the poorest members of society(Documents were released on 30th March 2007 under the Freedom of Information Act from Her Majesty's Treasury). Now, who on earth would advise Brown to go ahead with these changes despite those dire warnings. Well, he had 2 "special" advisers, Mr Ed Balls and Mr Ed Milliband. All of a sudden Balls and Milliband are on the side of hardworking low paid workers, fighting for the pension rights of these people. What is the difference, is it because they are in the pockets of the unions, or is it because they care about the public, but not the private sector. To repeat Brown, Balls and Milliband were warned what would happen, were warned it would hit the poorest hardest, yet still went ahead. It was short termism of the highest order. They got money then and there, to spend on their pet projects, but who is going to look after the poorest private sector workers who lost their pensions, our children are and our children's children.

unfortunately, I am unbale to take credit for this idea. It was a expert on Sky news who suggested it, quickly shot down by the union Brother, who went white at the thought of having to fund the gap instead of taxpayers. But unions having "colossal power" at the heart of Govenrment and "being able to wreak havoc on anything they like" is nothing new, they already have veto over choosing the Labour leader,and provide 80% of their funds.

If that's the case, then lets let the union take them over. There's no need for an audit, the unions say that the schemes are cash rich and dont need taxpayers money, If I was George Osborne I'd say "great, here you go, take them over". Take the LGPS out of political hands and hand them over to the unions, who are there to protect their members interests. Surely it's a win-win situation, if there is a hole, Union members fill it not taxpayers and if there isn't the members can have a decent retirement fund. Why on earth aren't the unions calling for this option.Is it because they know that in future there will be a hole which the tax payer will have to fill?

Had Lambert broken his leg in the game and missed most of the remaining league games, then Adkins would have been slated on here. We lost to CP in the cup, would much rather get 3 points in the league fixture their.

That was the exact point that was made on Sky news, that led to the response I posted. I think it was a member of the IFS, who then suggested that if that was the case, then unions take over the funding of members pensions. Instead of welcoming it, as you have done. The union representitive waffled, stalled and ignored the susgestion. Leading me to the conclusion that they are well aware that there will be a funding hole, that the tax payer will have to fill.......

I would take West Ham winning every one of their remaining games in return for us to win at their place. I couldn't care less if West Ham run away with it, providing they beat Cardiff, Leicester, Boro and every other top half side. Who cares if we win the league, I dont? After all Brighton didn't get extra points for finishing above us last year.

What he was saying was that if the schemes and affordable, and some are in surplus as was claimed, then the unions finance any short fall or keep any surplus. If they are not going to cost us any more as a portion of GDP in the future, lets get the taxpayer to contribute what they did in the last year of the Labour administration, increase it by inflation each year and then the unions can make up any shortfall. I'm sure we can work out what the taxpayers contribution was in 2009, we should give this amount (plus inflation) to the Brothers, to divi out to their members. If it's affordable, then pensions will stay the same, if not The Brothers can either get their members to work longer ,pay more in, or take it out of their own union funds.

A bloke on Sky news made a great point. If the Public sector pensions are affordable and Osbourne and Cameron are telling porkies (the NUT claim there is a £46.4 billion surplus paid into their fund) then why dont the public sector unions take over the running of their members pensions? For some reason the union henchman in the studio didn't want to answer that point...........

Apart from being a presenter of Top Gear a very very popular TV programme since 1988, which people are forced to watch at gun point. Apart from earning £1.7 million a year from books, DVD's and newspaper articles, which people are forced to buy at gun point. What talent does Clakson have? I'm pretty talentless, where do I sign up for a job like his? It must be pretty easy to earn £2.7mil a year if he can do it, perhaps some of our talented teachers should give it a go. If a nobody like Clarkson can do so well, think how well NUT's finest would get on in the same role.

The end for decent pension provision for Private sector workers can be traced back to March 1998 and Gordon Brown's first budget.He plundered the pensions of hardworking people and was specifically warned against doing so and what the consequences would be. Documents were released on 30th March 2007 under the Freedom of Information Act from Her Majesty's Treasury which show that Internal Treasury forecasts, advised that his changes would "cause a shortfall in existing assets of up to £75 billion" and that "employers would have to contribute about an extra £10 billion a year for the next 10 to 15 years to get pension scheme funding back on track".These papers that were sent to Gordon Brown the Chancellor before he did away with the dividend tax credit and also advised that the worst effected victims would be the poorest members of society. Faced with a £10 billion a year bill for another 10-15 years nearly all companies did away with their defined benefit plans.

I've just been down to Poole,where the bridge was meant to be shut to traffic all day. Saw a couple of clowns........sorry, union members hanging around, and asked them if this was a picket line? "Sort of" was the reply. Asked them why the bridge was open to traffic, when it was meant to be closed. Turns out that they just wanted to disurpt the rush hour traffic this morning, to inconvience people like me, who pay their wages, but had now decided to go back to work and open the bridge. So much for a day of action, and high principles. They seemed to have hit on a new form of industrial action, the "lie in". Where union members have an extra couple of hours in bed, and then go to work. It's a win-win, ****es off the public but they dont lose much pay............

I thought long and hard about whether to support this strike but cant bring myself to do so. After all Ed Milliband, the union placement at the top of the Labour Party calls them "irresponsible" and has refused to support them. If Red Ed (who owes his job to the unions) doesn't support them, why should I, someone who contributes to their wages, do so?

Here's the table at the same stage last year......... http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/league-championship/2010-2011/table/2010-11-28 QPR had 41 points compared to our 42, and were 8 points clear of 3rd which is the same as us. If anybody is not happy with that, they are seriously deluded.

I dont particulary like sticking up for Skates, but there are differences to our situation. SLH and SFC were basically the same, surely even the most one eyed Saints fan will concede that. Their situation is more like West Ham's, and they didn't get a deduction when their parent company went into admin.

It's a bit rich complaining about parents only being concerned about themselves and the disruption to their lives, when the strike is purely about you. Sod the rest of us, who would love the pension that outrages you so much.

Happened to me at the Brighton game. Went down the office and they gave me the 2 I left at home for £10 each, even though my lad’s ticket was only £10 in the first place. I asked them about producing the originals and getting my £20 back, but they said they only did that for Season ticket holders who forget their tickets. At the end of the day, it was my fault I left the tickets at home and my mistake cost me £20.00

That picture makes me laugh everytime. It's like something out of Phoenix Nights. I'm sure The Echo are taking the **** keep printing that particular picture.

About 2 years ago I got a letter in the post telling me from now on my contributions were going up 2% and I would only receive 1/80th of my final salary, rather than 1/60th. They also closed the final salary scheme for new members. No discussion, no negotiation.Just that's it,take it or leave it.But I understood that this was done out of necessity,not out of spite and was done to protect the scheme and the company.I'm amazed at the lack of understanding shown by the unions and some public sector workers regarding the situation we are in as a country. They couldn't care less about the cost to the country and to future taxpayers. This is not a strike about principle, or about poor work conditions, or any moral crusade. It is purely about Public sector workers, who benefitted from the boom, refusing to accept that they will have to contribute to getting us out of the bust. I just hope the Govt have the balls to stand up to the unions, withdraw the last generous offer and then set about changing the law around strike action. Personally, I would like to see 1 day strikes outlawed. They are the cowards way out of protesting, an unpaid day off is no real hardship when you have a job with a steady income. They are just designed to inconvience the very people who are paying their pensions. If you want to go on strike, then fine go on strike, but dont come back in until the dispute is over one way or the other. Let's see how many of the Brothers members will vote for weeks and weeks with no pay coming in.

This is another issue, like The EU, where the politicans of all 3 main parties dont give a flying F what the people want. Along with the establishment, they have decided that immigration is a good thing and that's the end of it. You only have to look at Gordon Brown's response to Gillian Duffy's perfectly reasonable question about it (when he thought the mike was off), to know what our leaders really think. Most live in a bubble, seeing the country as one big Cosmopolitan city.

I'm going for Bernie Madoff,

What's well? Putting more in, or getting more out?

What a load of shiete. I thought for a minute that this was something the school had set my 12 year old to do.I take it we are paying for someone to design this nonsense out of our licence fee? To suggest that all you need to do is put your income, age ,and number of family members, to get a true reflection of your contribution is laughable.

Grant had no choice but to front up. Had there been a privacy law, would he have been quite so up front about it. You may not be interested in this sort of stuff, but thousends of your fellow countrymen are, they have given us the press we have now, because had they followed your lead and not bought the papers until they stop printing this stuff, they would have stopped. I happen to find Coogan, who starred in Fox's Night at the Museum, calling News International a "protection racket" and talking of Rupert Murdoch's toxic legacy,a complete and utter hypercrite. "Your Company is a protection racket, you will leave a toxic legacy,but thanks for the cheque"