General News Thread

[Jattdogg]

16 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Netenyahu is openly going around telling anybody that will listen that he is the "King of America" and the war only ends when he says so. 

Really makes trump look like a weak president. Some say the weakest president ever.

[Samilktray]

Netanyahu is such a ghoul 

[fox_up_north]

22 minutes ago, Jattdogg said:

Really makes trump look like a weak president. Some say the weakest president ever.

He'd still call that an achievement

[kenny]

On 08/04/2026 at 11:24, CornwallFox said:

It's not been in a manifesto or party policy for 16 years. Should they really need to go around debunking every lie spread on social media? Should we not expect the proper media to just be, you know, honest? 

Q: [From the Daily Mail] Will you drop your plan to cut motorway speed limits to 55mph in the light of polling showing 60% of your supporters are not in favour?

Polanski says the Mail and the Telegraph are always going through past Green party policy documents, and ignoring qualifing comments saying the policy is under development.

He says, in a fuel crisis, reducing speed limits can make sense. But he says he wants more focus on public transport.

 

Well at least we now know for certain that whilst its not in the manifesto it isn't being ruled out either. 

[Clogger_]

43 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Netenyahu is openly going around telling anybody that will listen that he is the "King of America" and the war only ends when he says so. 

You know this how? Sounds fake to me

[st albans fox]

8 minutes ago, kenny said:

Q: [From the Daily Mail] Will you drop your plan to cut motorway speed limits to 55mph in the light of polling showing 60% of your supporters are not in favour?

Polanski says the Mail and the Telegraph are always going through past Green party policy documents, and ignoring qualifing comments saying the policy is under development.

He says, in a fuel crisis, reducing speed limits can make sense. But he says he wants more focus on public transport.

 

Well at least we now know for certain that whilst its not in the manifesto it isn't being ruled out either. 

You don’t rule stuff out unless you absolutely have to. 

if Polanski refuted the recent media reports then that should be good enough for now.  There is no GE for another three years. 
 

[st albans fox]

Apparently we’re very cross that the Russians are mapping our undersea cable networks connecting us to the continent and americas. 

 

I’d hope that we’d be doing exactly the same with vital Russian comms networks.  You won’t be able to do this kind of stuff if war does break out.  You have to be prepared. 
 

I guess my question is - the Russians are doing it, they will know that we know they’re doing it.  Is the govt announcing it to push the narrative back into public discourse that Russians = bad ?

[CornwallFox]

27 minutes ago, kenny said:

Q: [From the Daily Mail] Will you drop your plan to cut motorway speed limits to 55mph in the light of polling showing 60% of your supporters are not in favour?

Polanski says the Mail and the Telegraph are always going through past Green party policy documents, and ignoring qualifing comments saying the policy is under development.

He says, in a fuel crisis, reducing speed limits can make sense. But he says he wants more focus on public transport.

 

Well at least we now know for certain that whilst its not in the manifesto it isn't being ruled out either. 

So their transport policies are under review, as you would expect given it's a relatively new leadership. How does that equate to screaming headlines that they plan to reduce motorway speed limits to 55mph? It's clearly untruths being spread to attack a party. This is not helpful to democracy. 

It's exactly the same as the daily mail spreading lies about labour planning to introduce a garden tax on the eve of an election, when no such thing was in their manifesto. We need a media that is free to challenge anybody, but we also need a media that deals in facts.

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Apparently we’re very cross that the Russians are mapping our undersea cable networks connecting us to the continent and americas. 

 

I’d hope that we’d be doing exactly the same with vital Russian comms networks.  You won’t be able to do this kind of stuff if war does break out.  You have to be prepared. 
 

I guess my question is - the Russians are doing it, they will know that we know they’re doing it.  Is the govt announcing it to push the narrative back into public discourse that Russians = bad ?

It's all part of the ridiculous dance that nation states appear to have to undergo. 

 

Of course they know. And we know they know. And they know we know they know. 

 

Like you said, the outrage here appears really performative. 

 

3 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

So their transport policies are under review, as you would expect given it's a relatively new leadership. How does that equate to screaming headlines that they plan to reduce motorway speed limits to 55mph? It's clearly untruths being spread to attack a party. This is not helpful to democracy. 

It's exactly the same as the daily mail spreading lies about labour planning to introduce a garden tax on the eve of an election, when no such thing was in their manifesto. We need a media that is free to challenge anybody, but we also need a media that deals in facts.

That's what the press regulator is supposed to be for, but seeing what the Mail, Telegraph and Express can print without apparently being pulled up for it, they don't seem to want to do much actual regulating. 

[kenny]

4 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

So their transport policies are under review, as you would expect given it's a relatively new leadership. How does that equate to screaming headlines that they plan to reduce motorway speed limits to 55mph? It's clearly untruths being spread to attack a party. This is not helpful to democracy. 

It's exactly the same as the daily mail spreading lies about labour planning to introduce a garden tax on the eve of an election, when no such thing was in their manifesto. We need a media that is free to challenge anybody, but we also need a media that deals in facts.

So I think his answer was supposed to be, I appreciate that the mail has found an older policy in the archives of our website, but I can confirm that it is not party policy and we have no plans to introduce it in the future.

 

It could be he did say something like that and was misquoted by the guardian of course.

[Clogger_]

Thought about this. Why is 55 mph limit *really* an issue? I think I'd be fine with it, if properly enforced

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, Clogger_ said:

Thought about this. Why is 55 mph limit *really* an issue? I think I'd be fine with it, if properly enforced

I believe that it’s set this level because it delivers best fuel consumption. 
but its also the speed that HGVs travel at so you’ll have cars and lorry’s occupying the same space on motorways.  I’m not sure that the standard of driving in this country makes this a good idea.  Too many impatient drivers who will be breaking the speed limit. 

 

perhaps we would see more accidents but fewer fatal ones because speed is less of a factor ??

[Lionator]

49 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Apparently we’re very cross that the Russians are mapping our undersea cable networks connecting us to the continent and americas. 

 

I’d hope that we’d be doing exactly the same with vital Russian comms networks.  You won’t be able to do this kind of stuff if war does break out.  You have to be prepared. 
 

I guess my question is - the Russians are doing it, they will know that we know they’re doing it.  Is the govt announcing it to push the narrative back into public discourse that Russians = bad ?

There’s probably a political element to why the defence secretary is bigging it up.

 

”THIS is why we didn’t send the British navy and air force to Iran” while like you say, further push the narrative that Russia is a grave danger to the UK. 

[CornwallFox]

30 minutes ago, kenny said:

So I think his answer was supposed to be, I appreciate that the mail has found an older policy in the archives of our website, but I can confirm that it is not party policy and we have no plans to introduce it in the future.

 

It could be he did say something like that and was misquoted by the guardian of course.

You seem to be ignoring the point here. It isn't current policy. His quote that you shared specifically talks about newspapers pulling out old policies and ignoring the fact they are reviewing their policies. He doesn't commit to any policy, obviously, given they don't have a current policy. 

 

So therefore when newspapers claim that the greens are pursuing a 55mph policy it is not true. 

 

Granted, he hasn't ruled it out, in the same way he hasn't ruled out increasing it to 100mph, but there is no current policy. Therefore claims made by the mail, telegraph etc are not true. 

 

 

[Jon the Hat]

7 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

You seem to be ignoring the point here. It isn't current policy. His quote that you shared specifically talks about newspapers pulling out old policies and ignoring the fact they are reviewing their policies. He doesn't commit to any policy, obviously, given they don't have a current policy. 

So therefore when newspapers claim that the greens are pursuing a 55mph policy it is not true. 

Granted, he hasn't ruled it out, in the same way he hasn't ruled out increasing it to 100mph, but there is no current policy. Therefore claims made by the mail, telegraph etc are not true. 

If they are gaining a lot of traction in the polls, heading into an election period, and they don have firm policies, it is not the job of the media to question and look to the past and see what they would likely do?

 

It is important that the media points out how utterly unfit for power these kooks really are, whether that is the nonsense of reform of the batshit idiocy of the greens.  Both should be no more than a pressure group focussed on their one or two issues, they clearly don't have the bandwidth or the brains to put together a thought out, costed manifesto.  Mind you nor to the government.

[CornwallFox]

16 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

If they are gaining a lot of traction in the polls, heading into an election period, and they don have firm policies, it is not the job of the media to question and look to the past and see what they would likely do?

 

It is important that the media points out how utterly unfit for power these kooks really are, whether that is the nonsense of reform of the batshit idiocy of the greens.  Both should be no more than a pressure group focussed on their one or two issues, they clearly don't have the bandwidth or the brains to put together a thought out, costed manifesto.  Mind you nor to the government.

Of course media should look at what they would likely do. But is it likely that they'll re-introduce a policy that they got rid of 16 years ago and would be hugely unpopular? Of course it's not likely. But they aren't pushing the idea to honestly discuss possible policy are they? Let's stop playing games, they're putting up those headlines to intentionally mislead people into believing it's their policy. Which is clearly not helpful to democracy. 

 

As to the rest of your post, all policies for all parties should be discussed and aired publicly, but it should be an honest discussion based on honesty about what is party policy. We really need to get past the post-fact world in which we currently live and get back to agreeing in what is factual and then debating differences in opinion as to what the response to those facts should be. 

[davieG]

Don't all parties have policies they've had and then put aside/abandoned as membership changes with different prominent members having different ideas and priorities.

[kenny]

52 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Of course media should look at what they would likely do. But is it likely that they'll re-introduce a policy that they got rid of 16 years ago and would be hugely unpopular? Of course it's not likely. But they aren't pushing the idea to honestly discuss possible policy are they? Let's stop playing games, they're putting up those headlines to intentionally mislead people into believing it's their policy. Which is clearly not helpful to democracy. 

 

As to the rest of your post, all policies for all parties should be discussed and aired publicly, but it should be an honest discussion based on honesty about what is party policy. We really need to get past the post-fact world in which we currently live and get back to agreeing in what is factual and then debating differences in opinion as to what the response to those facts should be. 

So he should have said no it isn't policy? 

[Footballwipe]

You can't pussyfoot around stuff like this anymore - all and sundry think Green's policy is to lower the speed limit to 55mph. It's ridiculous and classic tactics by the right-wing press who are scared stiff by him.

 

But they have to deal with it. ZP has been good as social media stuff - he could've easily come out and dismissed it plainly. It wouldn't have caught everyone but it'd be abundantly clear what the position is to try and quell the drip drip of nonsense.

 

This is easy fodder for those who want to jump on tiny things. We know that people don't like A) having things they have now taken away from them, and B) their lives interfered with. This ticks both boxes. Ironically all parties have policies which this would apply to, but stuff like speed limits is so sensitive, look at the 20 zones in Leicester and Wales.

[leicsmac]

50 minutes ago, kenny said:

So he should have said no it isn't policy? 

Would it really have mattered if he did?

 

That area of the press will be looking to pillory him by any means necessary and if they can't get an easy reason, they'll fabricate one that their readership will swallow like taffy anyway. 

[Sampson]

52 minutes ago, kenny said:

So he should have said no it isn't policy? 

He’s probably learnt the lesson of Labour in the last election with their “ming vase strategy” tbf, who spent the whole election cycle and their manifesto saying they weren’t going to do this and that in trying to defend themselves from the Tory attack line. They ended up painting themselves into a corner where they can’t actually do anything.

 

5 years in an incredibly long time in this day and age with how many crisis there are in the world, it’s not the predictable world order 90s or 00s anymore. You can say you’re not going to raise taxes or just the customs union or certain international institutions; but then your biggest ally starts publicly attacking you to the world. international wars and oil crisis happen and you’ve basically crippled your own options of responding to crisis years down the line… And you’ve allowed foreign bad actors to corner your decision making. 

 

I think any party would be silly to go down the path of constantly denying policy and saying they aren’t going to do xyz for the next election after the example Labour have set in the last one tbf.

Edited 9 April by Sampson

[CornwallFox]

1 hour ago, kenny said:

So he should have said no it isn't policy? 

What aren't you understanding here? 

They are developing their policy. 

You don't say anything is in or out until it's developed as who knows, maybe it could be (it won't be). 

No party days anything about policy until they fix it. 

I really don't know why you're still playing this stupid game.

[kenny]

1 hour ago, CornwallFox said:

What aren't you understanding here? 

They are developing their policy. 

You don't say anything is in or out until it's developed as who knows, maybe it could be (it won't be). 

No party days anything about policy until they fix it. 

I really don't know why you're still playing this stupid game.

No games here. You accused the right wing media of making it up. Polanski was asked about it and decided not to deny it was being discussed.

 

So it's not made up by the media just to pick on the poor greens, it is being considered as part of their transport policy. The only stupid game being played is to try and defend a party from being asked about it's policies. Weird.

 

For what it's worth, it would be entirely logical for the green party to consider policies like this and it would be odd if they didn't IMO.

[CornwallFox]

51 minutes ago, kenny said:

No games here. You accused the right wing media of making it up. Polanski was asked about it and decided not to deny it was being discussed.

 

So it's not made up by the media just to pick on the poor greens, it is being considered as part of their transport policy. The only stupid game being played is to try and defend a party from being asked about it's policies. Weird.

 

For what it's worth, it would be entirely logical for the green party to consider policies like this and it would be odd if they didn't IMO.

Nonsense. It's being used as an attack with zero basis in current policy. Very, very clearly. Should it become policy then it would be absolutely legitimate to focus on it. But it isn't. Beggars belief anybody tries to defend this nonsense. 

[kenny]

6 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Nonsense. It's being used as an attack with zero basis in current policy. Very, very clearly. Should it become policy then it would be absolutely legitimate to focus on it. But it isn't. Beggars belief anybody tries to defend this nonsense. 

Perhaps the media should ignore him altogether? Then you can complain that they have deplatformed him instead.

 

Serious politicians want to be questioned by the media so the public knows who they are and what they are about.

 

Grifters want to hang around on social media and don't want difficult questions so they can't be shown that they don't really have a clue.

 

I know which camp I believe ZP and NF sit in.