Of course there is. You use Daily Mail (understandably) as an insult but keep quoting the Uber story that came from the same paper.

Clear display of having no idea how policy is set or enacted. Despite Mrs U-Turn's best efforts we still live in a democracy of sorts.

Labour are committed to Trident. Corbyn might not like it but he doesn't have sole discretion over Labour's policy.

That is utter rubbish. Unsurprisingly you've not backed that up with any evidence (there is none).

Austerity economics is the principal reason for wage stagnation.

[Link]

Caps on public sector pay, growth of zero hours contracts, cuts in benefits to the poorest. GDP growth is supported by growing consumer debt, which is back at pre-crisis levels. Productivity remains woefully low with the government exacerbating the problem through cuts in investment.

Some Tory treasury minister got owned by an Economics Professor on Newsnight last week on this very topic. He looked like an utter fool.

[Tweet Link]

Edited by CambridgeEagle (08 May 2017 10.19am)

What a childish argument.

Corbyn has said he would never use nuclear weapons so saying 'Labour are committed to Trident' is just repeating Labour's attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of the woolly thinkers.

It is nothing short of lying to people....Not unexpected of politicians but don't come on here and repeat the lie to me mate.

A policy doesn't push the button, the Prime Minister does and a deterrent isn't a deterrent if its use is ruled out....so take your arrogant hubris to someone silly enough to listen to it.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

yesterdays news rudi, were you up?

Given how trident works, its unknown whether any prime minister would give a launch order - and its foolish for the media and politicians to say otherwise.

Taking a decision to annihilate tens of millions of civilians, is a different reality to do it hypothetically. Especially given it will serve no purpose other than revenge (given the Prime Minister would only give a fire order in the face of a large scale soviet launch - in which case just about everyone in the UK has about five to ten minutes of existence). Is it really worth killing 10-15m Soviet citizens in response.

I'm pretty sure that most Prime Ministers will have thought long and hard about whether adding another 20m foreign corpses to the death toll serves any greater purpose.

There is a reason why the fire order letters on the Trident submarines are burnt, and never read.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]