Russell Brand's U-turn regarding voting

[Verdilac]

I wasn't going to post this but then I thought ,yeah maybe I should.

So anyway after months of Russel brand telling the world its a waste of time to vote he is now backing the labour party and Ed milliband.

A very curious turn of events as Mr milliband seems a little bit brainwashed in the interview below or possibly he is giving everyone a lesson about saying the same thing multiple times but in a different order.

Either way it all seems scripted & robotic.

It makes you wonder what was really at play on this occasion, I presume multiple different reactions from followers of Mr brand will all have been factored into a program to give part of a desired outcome for a particular benefactor or maybe a test in manipulation, then again it could just be a coincidence :clapping:

I do know a lot of young people though he made a lot of sense and were very keen on him and his views.


jlTggc0uBA8

[Cidersomerset]

I'm glad he has changed his view and advises everyone to vote .
I have said this on several posts , I have already voted by post.
Its a vital principle that is only century or so old for everyone.

http://i3.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/nostalgia/article7939963.ece/ALTERNATES/s615/Victoria-Baptist-Chapel.jpg



Saying that my candidate has no chance of getting in my constituency
as Sedgemoor is mainly rural and unfortunately vote conservative.
Proportional representation would at least mean more votes counted
towards a more representative MP. Than the first past the post method
we have in place.

I would definitely like a more open system , with the old boys network
dismantled and real freedom of press and a much fairer society all round,
but that has to evolve with more people waking up to the reality of what
is still done in our name behind closed doors and who ? really controls
our political classes at the top ? Hopefully this will change with the web
and social media. It did stop the UK invading Syria , but the establishment
will still find ways to bypass the public opinion , unless we can keep up
the pressure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE GUARDIAN

Russell Brand changes mind about voting and urges support for Labour

Comedian and previous ‘Mr Don’t Vote’ backs Ed Miliband after interviewing him,
telling his viewers of importance of getting Tories out of government

Short Vid of Russell on link......http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/04/russell-brand-changes-mind-about-voting-and-urges-support-for-labour

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you don't like any of your choices possibly do as David suggests....


http://www.davidicke.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/none-of-the-above1.jpg

[Cidersomerset]

Russell has looked at it at least and he goes thru his views of the parties today.
Remember he is a comedian / activist its up to ' YOU ' to choose who you want
to vote for. I know its difficult for many who do not have any interest in the
currant political system , but it is still the one we live under and at least Russell
is giving his views . No one has to follow him and vote Labour , ( I did not ) just
think about it and remember those who died for us to have the right. If you still do
not want to vote that is up to you.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emergency: VOTE To Start Revolution - Russell Brand The Trews (E312 )

zwGBTcIHN0U

Published on 4 May 2015


In today’s 'Trews Politics Week Conclusion' I recap last week’s episodes, reveal
Part 2 of ‘Milibrand’ and give my call to action for how to best use your vote to
save the country, and for future REVOLUTION.
Subscribe Here Now: http://tinyurl.com/opragcg and send links to video news
items of topical stories that you'd like me to analyse.
Buy a 'Trews' Tshirt here: http://www.russellbrand.com/trinkets/



====================================================
====================================================


David Cameron Is Threatening Your Children - NO JOKE! Russell Brand The Trews (E311)

qNjsBWuItSE


Published on 1 May 2015


The Trews: Politics Week continues and today I look at the Conservative’s political
party propaganda and analyse their policies, past promises and election tactics.

[panopticon]

I must admit I'd heard of that Miliband interview but never seen it before.

I thought it would be worse. At least he wasn't doing a Tony Abbott and repeating the same word over and over again... Or just standing there like a stunned mullet.

He's obviously using talking points that were given to him earlier in the day.

I don't agree with their use but they're the result of the 24 hour news cycle. The smallest mistake a politician makes is taken (often out of context), amplified and ridiculed by the news and anyone with a computer connection.

That's part of the problem with modern Western democracies. The nasty ridicule porn used to tear down people who have an opinion that another group disagree with.

Why are these talking points used?

So politicians get the message they want on the nightly news. It's all about controlling the message and trying to get their position presented in the way they want.

In relation to Brand's changed position.

I agree with Steve. The long hard fight for universal suffrage and the symbolic rights and recognition of equality bestowed through that are something that should be valued. My own position on this has changed over the years and while I think the representative democratic system is flawed (more so in the US) I think that engaging with that system is probably the only way to create change within that system (even though it is mostly controlled by corporations and media moguls).

-- Pan

[Ellisa]

As a result of Miliband's answers' extraordinary consistency it would be difficult for the interviewer to interpret his answer as anything other than what he said. I suppose the other way to do it is to meander, repeat single senseless words and phrases or stare stupidly, look cross and say nothing, a tactic pan has alluded to in Mr Abbot. The aim in both cases is to control the next news release. And I have to say, I thought Mr Miliband sounded reasonable!

I do not understand the reason for Brand's influence, but if he is urging everyone to vote I wholly support him! It's an odd idea that by witholding a vote the government is punished. Seats have been won by a single vote, or very close margins. Every vote is vital.

Preferential voting has its own problems by the way!

[rgray222]

Yes, elections can and have been stolen in past but what people don't understand is that when enough people get behind anything (not just voting) change can happen. When you don't vote you are playing right into the hands of the PTB. This is exactly what they want. If you believe that it is not possible to facilitate change........it ensures your inaction.

[heather6thsense]

This is interesting because Mr Milliband says the same thing five times over. It's a pity that he is taking up air time to pep eat the the same old rhetoric. In saying that thanks for posting it

[panopticon]

As a result of Miliband's answers' extraordinary consistency it would be difficult for the interviewer to interpret his answer as anything other than what he said. I suppose the other way to do it is to meander, repeat single senseless words and phrases or stare stupidly, look cross and say nothing, a tactic pan has alluded to in Mr Abbot. The aim in both cases is to control the next news release. And I have to say, I thought Mr Miliband sounded reasonable!

Yeah, where was the 3 word slogan in Miliband's interview?

It's almost like he's trying to get a point across. Not like Tones who has been known to blame his frequent stuff ups on drinking too much the night before (I kid you not, he has!).

At least in England the leaders still seem to construct sentences with a semblance of meaning. Not something anyone could accuse Tones of. Seemingly random words put next to each other (though obviously carefully chosen by focus groups) is about as much as we can expect from him. I'll repeat that because it's important, words seemingly randomly put next to each other are what we expect from him. That's right, we expect random words seemingly strung together and repeated to make sure we understand... Maybe I could have a future in politicking... :facepalm:


I do not understand the reason for Brand's influence, but if he is urging everyone to vote I wholly support him! It's an odd idea that by witholding a vote the government is punished. Seats have been won by a single vote, or very close margins. Every vote is vital.

Preferential voting has its own problems by the way!

I don't know Ellisa. That preferential voting system certainly makes life interesting. Try the Hare-Clark system (http://www.abc.net.au/elections/tas/2006/guide/hareclark.htm) we've got here in Tassie for a bit. Now that's exciting! :)

As I've noted before, the Tasmanian upper house is mostly independents. That's the tradition in Tassie. After all the derogatory things that get said about Tasmania and its population the democracy here is quite vibrant and bullsh!t often gets called what it is.

Remember how Palmer United got in trouble for their attack ads (http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/clive-palmer-denies-pup-broke-law-with-tasmania-election-ads-20140311-34juv.html) in Tassie? It's illegal to use an opponents name or image in advertising here in State election campaigns. Imagine what that would look like if it was Australia wide...

Anyway.

The various protest movements here have caused huge amounts of trouble for politicians and corporations and in my book that's a sign of a good democracy.

Engagement with systems of power and modifying the discursive processes surrounding the social/civic fabric so that "representative democracy" truly is.

There again, they all seem either related or somehow connected so the ability to have secrets is severely restricted. ;)

-- Pan

[panopticon]

Speak of the little snarlie deevil.

Tones has got himself hooked up in another debacle. Evidently last week his legion of minders told the Australian Ambassador to France that his partner should stay in the car when he was greeting Tones plane (and Tones of course, be a bit weird greeting a plane wouldn't it) at the airport.

Anyway, the Ambassador and his partner refused.

Nothing like a lil micro-management to get things goin' so well.

BTW, Tones has attended functions and all sorts of things with Mr & Mr Ambassador so this is probably a case of staff gone mad.

-- Pan

[Jantje]

http://http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8jv618r6h1qfvq9bo1_500.jpg

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8jv618r6h1qfvq9bo1_500.jpg

[M0JFK]

Brand as rebranded himself. More likely they have reprogramed him. We all know these people in the entertainment business are Illuminate programed bot's...lol Only joking folks, I like Brand, not his comedy but his political persuations.

[M0JFK]

Yes, elections can and have been stolen in past but what people don't understand is that when enough people get behind anything (not just voting) change can happen. When you don't vote you are playing right into the hands of the PTB. This is exactly what they want. If you believe that it is not possible to facilitate change........it ensures your inaction.

Quite the opposite, they know the scam aint working anymore and its what you will do about it sooner or later that does worry the bejesus out of them. It is no accident they are now resorting to goverment control using one or two party control for example the Conservatives running the show here with the Democrats.

In the revolutionary movement this type of control is called POPULARIST and it comes about when society is in a pre revolutionary period resulting in either revolution or fascism.

It is kind of a last ditched attempt to con the masses.

[Nasu]

When the dust settles on the next election, I think this counter intuitive move will not help him. By this move alone he has lost many of his supporters. It's time for him to stick to comedy and leave the Devine comedy to others, just my two cents... As for voting, if you want to hope to change the political canvass then vote, I don't so I won't. I won't ask what you did last Sunday it's no business of mine, if you like government vote..

Each to their own, my world view includes you and your old fashioned quirky democratic ish voting preferences... N

[Nasu]

Please don't confuse my disinterest in voting, to being inactive or somehow disconnected from our community. In my experience I have seen more real change on the ground happen by community leaders who were self created or appointed. I have seen people grow, buildings grow, businesses grow and communities grow, all from the vision of a few individuals and or groups, not government.. In my humble experience...

The only things I have experienced first hand via government is poorly managed poverty, poorly managed education, poorly managed healthcare, poorly managed currency, poorly managed infer-structure and last but not least poorly managed foreign policy which always leads to poorly managed wars with poorly managed outcomes..

I think a child can see this is not something worth encouraging with a vote.. If you want change, then be it, don't hope that the political class can help, in most cases they can't, in the cases they can, they are restricted by party influence or career ambition, either way, we are on our own... So let's get back to work.

If you can't or won't do it for yourself then maybe your government will do it for you, why don't you vote and see...... I've seen enough... N

[gnostic9]

Please don't confuse my disinterest in voting, to being inactive or somehow disconnected from our community. In my experience I have seen more real change on the ground happen by community leaders who were self created or appointed. I have seen people grow, buildings grow, businesses grow and communities grow, all from the vision of a few individuals and or groups, not government.. In my humble experience...

The only things I have experienced first hand via government is poorly managed poverty, poorly managed education, poorly managed healthcare, poorly managed currency, poorly managed infer-structure and last but not least poorly managed foreign policy which always leads to poorly managed wars with poorly managed outcomes..

I think a child can see this is not something worth encouraging with a vote.. If you want change, then be it, don't hope that the political class can help, in most cases they can't, in the cases they can, they are restricted by party influence or career ambition, either way, we are on our own... So let's get back to work.

If you can't or won't do it for yourself then maybe your government will do it for you, why don't you vote and see...... I've seen enough... N Hi Nasu, I agree, by voting, you are giving away your very own right to be responsible for your own life. if you feel that you cannot in any perceptible way be responsible for you, then by all means seek a leader that will do what he/she will do with you!

[Ellisa]

I agree, pan, that the proportional system in the Federal Senate, while annoying to the major parties, in fact reflects a democratic (note the small letter 'd') point of view. Normally the Australian parliament is strictly two-party, with independents being rare indeed. The present system must be annoying our favourite politician as it is proposed to stop the possibility of the minor parties gaining a Senate seat because so little legislation is filtering through. Personally I think both Mr Abbott and Mr Shorten should learn some new words --- consultation, negotiation, co-operation for example.

I once had to teach the Hare-Clark system. I got very muddled indeed! So did my students! I find Proportional Representation to be as far as I can cope with!

The ambassador's story was on the radio this morning. What a crass thing to do. Everyone is backing down now, and mostly trying to find someone else to blame! Some poor minion in the Diplomatic Corps is about to be appointed to very much less nice posting than Paris!

[araucaria]

I have written at length on how leadership works in both directions, in the sense of meeting people’s expectations – at such length that I’ll just give an address to check out: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77218-Alex-Jones-connects-the-dots-about-what-Executive-Orders-are-heading-us-towards&p=907931&viewfull=1#post907931 .

I heard Ed Miliband saying something similar in his Russell Brand interview. He seems to have taken on board the fact that voter expectations are on the upturn: more will be delivered because people are no longer expecting still worse than before (this has happened to some degree in the Church with the new pope). Focusing on the ‘disenfranchised’ i.e. the 7 million potential (unregistered) voters, and others who will ‘go fishing’ on polling day (the French metaphor for the disenchanted abstentionist vote) makes sense because these are the very ones who still have high expectations, and those expectations must be expressed in order for them to be fulfilled.

Sure, Miliband sounds extremely repetitive, but he is right to get one point across in a two minute interview, which is hardly a time to make a general policy statement. At school the teacher kept repeating things over and over till even the slowest understood, which for everyone else was somewhat boring to excruciatingly tedious, but that was the job that had to be done. This is Miliband’s message that he has literally had carved in stone: interviewers can’t get round it and neither can he.

Russell Brand has not changed his stance on voting. This is the message he has heard in response to his earlier complaint and is now responding to. The spiral of voter disenchantment seems to have bottomed out and some progress can now be made. Russell Brand has followed this curve without deviating and is finding that the situation has changed. It has.

[Verdilac]

Russell Brand has not changed his stance on voting. This is the message he has heard in response to his earlier complaint and is now responding to. The spiral of voter disenchantment seems to have bottomed out and some progress can now be made. Russell Brand has followed this curve without deviating and is finding that the situation has changed. It has.[/QUOTE]

Well I've actually been led to believe he has changed his view on voting or I wouldn't have posted, and if you would like to hear it from his own mouth then starting the log at 12.19 may change your opinion.
zwGBTcIHN0U

And as well as backing Labour he marginalises the smaller parties he interviews and lambastes the conservative party.

I didn't post what I did from a particular political point of view. I did post to highlight that he effectively rolls over and lets Mr Milliband scratch his belly like a good dog, but to be honest it seemed to be very reciprocal .

I will say one thing about the political situation here in England, in the inner cities at the pointy end of things its been no fun being at the mercy of these parties over the past 40-60 years, It really hasn't, my friends and family have seen the country turn from one version then another version of George orwell's 1984.

The current system has no accountability and it is thrived on and taken advantage of.
And so the cycle of insanity continues with the main objective of wasting taxpayers money,stripping the country of any assets and applying tax on tax on tax for anything that can be possibly be taxed, and then there's the new laws

Did you know the Tony blair's government passed over 2.600 new laws every year and this continued every year till he left office, he was in office 10 years.

Did anyone vote for him to do that?
In giving power away to THEM because people cannot be bothered or are to busy to take an interest in there own community has led to what we have, and it doesn't work for a lot of people.

[Earthlink]

Hey Verdilac, thanks for posting this vid of Russel, and yeah, I did notice his change of stance on voting. Considering what he has said on the entire joke known as politics, (poli meaning many, tics meaning blood sucking leeches) I was kind of stunned by it too, considering the previous rants on it from him. The rest of your observations: part of the chronicles of the human awakening. Some get it, some don't, and in the end all will insist they were the first : )

[panopticon]

I agree, pan, that the proportional system in the Federal Senate, while annoying to the major parties, in fact reflects a democratic (note the small letter 'd') point of view. Normally the Australian parliament is strictly two-party, with independents being rare indeed. The present system must be annoying our favourite politician as it is proposed to stop the possibility of the minor parties gaining a Senate seat because so little legislation is filtering through. Personally I think both Mr Abbott and Mr Shorten should learn some new words --- consultation, negotiation, co-operation for example.

I once had to teach the Hare-Clark system. I got very muddled indeed! So did my students! I find Proportional Representation to be as far as I can cope with!

The ambassador's story was on the radio this morning. What a crass thing to do. Everyone is backing down now, and mostly trying to find someone else to blame! Some poor minion in the Diplomatic Corps is about to be appointed to very much less nice posting than Paris!

G'day Ellisa,

I wouldn't fancy trying to teach the Hare-Clark to eager lil minds... It's easiest to think of it as bags of apples, oranges and avocados (them be the Tassie Greens :P ). Then make a lovely after lernin snackeroo for all those inquiring minds.

Anywho,..

I agree that the Mr & Mr Ambassador resignation is being downplayed.

Evidently when he resigned he was yelling and very upset about it.

That's being ignored by most of the MSM following Christine Milne's announcement and ahead of the Budget next week.

The adventure of the glorious Captain Aboott continues.

-- Pan

[panopticon]

In giving power away to THEM because people cannot be bothered or are to busy to take an interest in there own community has led to what we have, and it doesn't work for a lot of people.

This is a very important observation.

It's not necessarily that people are not interested in what is going on but many are simply too busy working 14 hour days while raising a family to become actively involved. These aren't bad people. They are just trying to get by and may not have time, interest or the ability to get to certain local events.

It points to one of the main failings that exists within democracies around the world.

When a population (ie the electorate) is disengaged from the political process then the political process itself can, in my view, be legitimately called into question.

It's easy for people to feel disempowered by the entire political process (look to the US for an example of that) and not part of their government (which I would cynically argue that other than the election process most aren't).

That is the nature of representative democracy.

It creates a political class and speaks to capital (and money), control and power being central to its (the political class) existence. Without the cross fertilisation between the political class and corporate interests representative democracy fails.

I advocate for a grassroot approach to democracy. For community engagement and, as Ellisa noted above, the principles of consultation, negotiating and cooperation.

Now, one of the interesting things that appeared in the UK over recent years was the introduction of the Big Society concept.

It was designed to fail as it basically decentralised certain local things to community groups without giving sufficient funding for those things to be successfully undertaken. Then the government stepped in, took control (& power) from the community group and said that obviously community groups couldn't do what they were tasked to.

In other words, control was granted but access to money (and to some extent power) was retained within the State. When the community group was unable to do what was asked the empowerment that the decentralisation process had provided the community was removed, effectively disempowering participants, while furthering distrust and disengagement with the entire political system.

This was a classic example of a centralised agency using its capital (including money), control and power to change how the discursive processes permeating the society were not only undertaken but also how they were constructed.

For damning analysis of the Big Society concept see:
Whose Society: The Final Big Society Audit (http://www.civilexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Whose-Society_The-Final-Big-Society-Audit_final.pdf) (pdf report 2.4 mb)
Why the ‘big society’ is now just a hashtag for coalition hypocrisy (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jan/20/the-big-society-civil-exchange-audit-shows-coalition-contempt-and-hypocrisy)

-- Pan

[Cidersomerset]

I think this is a good response by Russell and he has learnt another lesson in life.


Russell Brand speaks out about election results

Sw6NfYMooT4

Published on 8 May 2015


====================================================
====================================================


The only good thing about this 'Eton Mess' governing is there is going to
be a referendum over staying or leaving the EEC. When Britain voted to join
back in the 70's it was as a trading block without tarrifs basically. Since then
things have developed into a bigger unwieldy bureaucracy , with a president,
anthem, flag and talk of an army.

http://www.davidicke.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Untitled-37-587x321.jpg


===================================================


The probable next Tory leader is re elected back into the house of commons ,
though he is not that common and its appropriate he is flanked by comic candidates.
Boris acts the buffoon and plays to the crowd and camera , but he is a calculated
conservative to the core.


http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/media/9430124/boris-johnson-victory-speech-flanked-by-two-colourful-electoral-rivals-via-twitter.jpg

=================================================
=================================================


Today (15:33) BST
Final Result In

The final result is in from St Ives - a Conservative victory.

This brings the final tally up to:
Conservatives: 331
Labour: 232
Lib Dem: 8
Ukip: 1
SNP: 56
Green: 1
Other: 22

===============================================


This was on the Huffington post , I don't know how accurate it is but gives an idea,
how things might have gone under proportionate representation, and every ones
vote counted.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/05/07/election-night-2015-exit-poll-result_n_7235236.html#244_under-proportional-representation-tories-would-still-have-won

elliot herman
‏@els76uk If every vote counted, here’s how many seats each party would have #proportionalrepresentation #GE2015

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CEe4ZddWgAEdpfK.png

[Cidersomerset]

Davids reaction to the UK election result.............

The David Icke Videocast: Vote System - Get System

-WLI1A2WAb4

Published on 8 May 2015


**David Icke’s Acclaimed 2014 All-Day AWAKEN!! Wembley Presentation Now Available To See On Demand** http://www.davidicke.com

** Limited Edition Wembley 2014 poster available: http://www.davidicke.com/sh...... **

====================================================



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/2015UKElectionMap_-_Ilford_%26_Clwyd_fixed%2C_recoloured.svg/1020px-2015UKElectionMap_-_Ilford_%26_Clwyd_fixed%2C_recoloured.svg.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015

[Cidersomerset]

http://static.bbci.co.uk/frameworks/barlesque/2.83.4/orb/4/img/bbc-blocks-dark.png

Election 2015: What difference would proportional representation have made?

9 May 2015... From the section Election 2015

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/media/images/82880000/gif/_82880104_proprep.gif
Nigel Farage, Nick Clegg and Natalie Bennett

UKIP, the Lib Dems and Greens would have benefited from proportional representation

"The time has come for real, genuine, radical political reform," Nigel Farage said after
losing his bid to take Thanet South from the Conservatives.

The UKIP leader had increased his party's share of the vote in the seat by 27%, and
nationally UKIP's vote share was up by 10 percentage points to a total of 3.9 million.

Still, the party won just one constituency under the UK's first-past-the-post voting system.

The Greens' ambitions were similarly thwarted: they won more than a million votes but
just one seat.

The Electoral Reform Society, a campaign group, has modelled what would have happened
under a proportional voting system that makes use of the D'Hondt method of converting
votes to seats.


http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/82873000/png/_82873519_prop_rep-01.png

FPTP v PR
The Conservatives would have won 75 fewer seats but would still have been the largest
party in the Commons. Labour too would have taken fewer seats.

The SNP's dramatic increase in seats of 50 would have been curtailed to 25.

But UKIP, the Lib Dems and the Greens would have fared much better.

UKIP would have been a force to be reckoned with in the Commons with 83 seats.

Mr Farage has not yet declared which of the many alternative voting systems he would favour,
but any more proportional system would be likely to give him and other smaller parties a boost.

The contrasting fortunes of the different parties in Westminster under first past the post are
made clear by looking at the number of votes won for each winning candidate.

UKIP required more than 100 times as many votes for its lone elected MP than the Conservatives
did for each of theirs.

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/82873000/png/_82873516_votes_per_mp-01.png

Votes per MP
The scale of the above graph masks a shift in the figures for Westminster's two largest parties.

Votes per elected MP
For the first time in at least 20 years, the number of votes cast for each elected Labour MP has
overtaken the equivalent figure for the Conservatives.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32601281

[greybeard]

UKIP got more votes than S.N.P but then there were no S.N.P candidates south of the border.
There are more voters in Greater London than the whole of Scotland.
The problem for Scotland was that regardless of the Labour MPs elected in the past it was ruled by Conservative Government if that was what was elected by the sheer numbers of English voters--in other words the choice of the Scottish voters was over ruled most times.
Westminster MPs laughed at the failure of Scotland's yes vote in the referendum to bring about home rule---that was a big mistake.
Hence the surge in S.N.P membership and then only three seats went to other parties.
It was a massive swing.
Now if Scotland feels that its wishes are not treated with respect and fairly (Whatever that is) then if there is another home rule referendum I suspect that the outcome will be radically different from the last one.

I did not vote so don't have an axe to grind.

Whatever the result, it is up to me to act responsibly in the way I handle my income and expenditure.

Hope this Conservative Government and future ones will do the same.

Chris