back in Stockport over 20 years in Yorkshire #MCFC museums music & politics #dyslexic spelling & grammar unreliable #makevotesmatter @ben63.bsky.local
Joined July 2008
- Tweets76.1K
- Following5.1K
- Followers2.4K
- Likes346K
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Can anyone remember the last time @BBCNews interviewed a Palestinian about their experience of the racism of Zionism? Having spent the last two weeks interviewing elderly Nakba survivors in Jordan, driven off their land in their teens because of their ethnicity and religion, I'd be happy to suggest some astonishingly articulate victims of Israeli racism who would be only too happy to tell their tragic stories of eviction, slaughter and dispossession. It is like reporting on the Civil Rights movement in the US and only interviewing outraged Whites
@bbclaurak @bbcnickrobinson @JustinOnWeb
@BBCr4today
“[Saying] ‘Zionism is racism’ is offensive, it’s antisemitic and it’s dangerous”
Broadcaster Jo Coburn says she “watched in horror” as the Green Party passed its motion on Zionism and criticises leader Zack Polanski's defence in his #BBCLauraK interview
bbc.co.uk/news/live/c64gv8k2…
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Helen Whately knows sweet FA about mental health and neurodiversity.
All she is interested in is scoring political points by appealing to those on the right, who want to cut benefits and protect the wealth of the super rich in the UK.
“The welfare system isn’t helping people who are struggling with their mental health and neurodiversity”
Shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately defends Conservative policies to encourage young people into work
#BBCLauraK
bbc.co.uk/news/live/c64gv8k2…
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Left: Conservative Helen Whately criticised Labour for 174,000 young people unemployed under Labour, suggesting they have the policies to fix it
Right: But under the Conservatives, there were 872,000 young people unemployed, because of Conservative policy
My view:
Helen Whately talks as though the Conservatives have just arrived to discover a problem somebody else created. They governed Britain for 14 years.
They had 14 years to improve education, strengthen training and help young people into secure employment. Yet in the final full quarter before they left office, an estimated 872,000 young people were outside education, employment or training. Roughly one in eight.
That is a record they must answer for. If their policies offer such convincing solutions now, why did their government leave so many young people without those opportunities?
Whately cannot claim authority on fixing the problem while skipping over her party’s responsibility for tackling it when it actually held power. Fourteen years gave the Conservatives ample time to turn promises into results.
Labour deserves scrutiny. But Conservative politicians demanding better outcomes should start by explaining their own failures. Losing an election does not wipe away 14 years in government—or turn the people who failed to solve a problem into credible experts on fixing it.
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Can also include 1983 stopping clubs splitting gate receipts 50:50
Same 3 clubs forced it through
This guy absolutely nails it, folks. The “cartel” argument isn’t simply about who lifts the pots.
It’s about the bigger picture: being there year after year, facing no genuine, sustainable opposition, is often all that’s needed to serve the interests of those who designed and benefit from this model.
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
There’s a glaring hypocrisy among those who have declared Manchester City guilty before the process has concluded. For them, City are already guilty. There is no verdict left to await, no evidence left to assess and no process left to respect. City must simply accept whatever punishment follows, while players (former and current) and fans are expected to adopt particular views about the owners and the club’s conduct. Everything has already been decided.
But ask those same people whether they’d accept City being cleared, including following any appeal, and the response is invariably: “OK. They got away with it.” So a guilty verdict must be respected, but an innocent one can be dismissed? They don’t want due process. They want their predetermined verdict validated.
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Those sneaky migrants, not only are they lazy and living off benefits, they're also taking all the jobs!
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
If you are going to argue that it's too expensive to help some people into work, based on the cost of accommodating their needs, you have to accept that those people will need benefits instead.
Those are the options.
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
So they're at it again 🙄
Torturing valid HMRC data to create wildly misleading headlines, designed to invoke fear and anger about immigrants.
Same old, same old...
(and you'll see just how old shortly!)
🧵1/28
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Looks like selling Royal Mail to a Czech billionaire worked out every bit as well as selling our water system to an Australian investment bank and our steel industry to an Indian multinational
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
When I met Angela Rayner to campaign for change to overly aggressive council tax debt collection, with its unprecedented rapid escalation to balliffs, she nodded like most politicians do.
I explained it was destructive for individuals, councils and the economy. She listened more then said she'd change it. I was sceptical. Yet a consultation was launched within weeks and delightfully the change announced within 18mths (its in place from next April) - bullet train pace for politics.
I've a rule that if I campaign for a politician (of any party) to do something, and they do it, I say thank you. Its important to recognise it. So thank you so much Angela Rayner for listening and more importantly acting. The changes coming are a great start.
I promised we'd make council tax fairer, and I’m getting on with the job.
Too many working people have seen council tax debt spiral before they had the chance to get help.
That's why we're introducing more time to pay, clearer warnings if you miss a payment and more support from councils.
Thanks to @MartinSLewis and @mmhpi for their tireless campaigning to make this change happen.
Here's everything you need to know ⬇️
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Honest Bob Jenrick's claim that "4 in 5 new jobs were taken by migrants" is misleading.
Jenrick's claim rests on a calculation by the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ), the right-wing think tank founded and chaired by Iain Duncan Smith, which funding-transparency site Who Funds You? gave a D grade, the second-lowest transparency rating, in September 2023.
It was then amplified by the Telegraph. While the basic arithmetic roughly holds, at each step the claim drifts further from what the data shows.
1. They are not "new jobs".
The figure compares HMRC payroll counts in December 2014 and December 2025. That is a net change, not a count of jobs created.
Millions of jobs open and close every year, and most are filled by UK nationals. In fact, people who were non-UK citizens when they registered for National Insurance held 20% of employee jobs in December 2025, up from 12% in 2014. Four in five payroll jobs are still held by UK nationals.
2. The numbers don't relate to individual people.
The data counts payrolled employments, so one person with two jobs is counted twice. The Telegraph's own chart says as much.
3. Many of the "migrants" are British.
HMRC records nationality once, when someone first registers for National Insurance, and naturalisation is not recorded.
Someone who arrived in 2015 and became a British citizen in 2021 is still a "migrant" in this data. HMRC itself says this makes non-UK figures higher than the true counts.
4. "Taken" implies displacement the data cannot show.
The CSJ says jobs "went to" non-UK nationals. Jenrick says they were "taken". The figures show who holds jobs, not whether anyone lost out. The Migration Advisory Committee found that, across all immigrants over the full period studied, there was no statistically significant impact of migration on employment.
5. The time frame drives the result.
By the Telegraph's own chart, UK nationals accounted for roughly half the payroll growth between 2014 and 2019. The "one in five" figure depends on the 2021 to 2023 visa surge, which happened under the Conservative government in which Jenrick himself was Immigration Minister.
6. Self-employment is excluded.
PAYE data leaves out roughly four million self-employed people, so it does not measure all work.
In short, a narrow payroll statistic, which counts employments rather than people and permanently labels naturalised Britons as migrants, has become a claim about "new jobs" being "taken".
The underlying data supports neither word.
This fits a familiar Reform pattern: take a statistic, often from an opaquely funded right-wing think tank, strip away its caveats, and recast it as proof that migrants are taking something from “the British people”. Whatever the intent, the effect is the same: a narrow, heavily qualified finding becomes a story of grievance and resentment.
It's wrong, divisive, misleading and pathetic.
Bit more complicated than that retweeted
Desperate stuff, inciting hatred where there shouldn't be any. I don't know a single City fan who doesn't wish the likes of Villa, Newcastle, Leeds, Everton, Brighton well in their quest to win stuff and compete, but they can't. They're handcuffed to regulations that stop them.
Man City's cheating crushed Aston Villa's dreams. This is how an enormous financial black hole is still costing Unai Emery to this day - and the star names that would be playing for them if not for City's chicanery trib.al/thEnosL






















