Ant

Often such deals aren't actually that clear cut, sometimes certain organisations have the ability to sell/re-sell services on government frameworks or have established supply chains and mechanisms to get things faster and more transparently. Emphasis on the word - Often

How does the Tesla work as a company car? I’ve saw that the BIK is £0 for the foreseeable. Any other electric cars doing something similar?

I was a little after the game, but not bothered now. It's arguably the first competitive game since Kiev that the reds haven't needed to play with a level of intensity in the league/CL. Playing one of the best sides in Europe after that natural relaxation and intensity has been reduced was always going to be hard. Also the thing with City is that when they score and play well they typically destroy any side, I know that's sort of an obvious statement but I felt it was going to end badly after 1-0.

I agree with all of that, but without reverting to another crap analogy. I think the further we entrench our views on the left, the less likely we are to have change that will impact the very people the left are there to protect.

Thanks for that. I think that's all fair enough and I don't see this is being a right/wrong debate and you've made me look at this in a different way (I'm trying to be sincere and it's not coming across correctly without me sounding insincere) My only retort would be on your last sentence, in that you're right this is about real people. I just feel intuitively however that the approach that (Not BLM) that the politics of momentum and the far left of the labour party are doing the most damage in terms of the opportunity for there to be real and substantive change in a country which is inherently right wing, conservatives voting and yes institutionally racist. Left Wing policies and politics are intertwined with that of BLM and I guess what I am trying to say that, Keir needs to be careful about supporting a elements of a radical left wing agenda that is unpalatable to the electorate, how you do that without seemingly undermining the message of BLM is a difficult one. I have sympathy for him. If you're expecting him to support the sentiments behind such a statement like Defend the Police whole-heartedly it isn't going to happen, because he won't win and Labour won't be in power and we'll be having this argument again in another 5 years time. Could he have handled it better, yes, could he have been more nuanced, probably. But if Labour and Starmer keep doing what we've always done then we'll never get the change we need. In summary, from a personal perspective I accept that BLM feel Starmer has undermined them, I accept and I understand a little through his sentiments (in the best way a white man can) why they feel that's the case.

We're all people who haven't listened enough, we're all on that journey. I can understand why BLM think he's undermining them, but that doesn't mean I agree with that stance, nor should it be a negative reflection of mine or anyone's judgment, belief or support of equality for all and the support of the BLM message.

I'm judging politics by the result of the last election, and the electorate opinion, and that if he wants to be in power he's got to play the long game and in addition, reflect this opinion that Defunding the Police in its literal sense is a bad idea. I understand why people may interpret what he said in the way they have but honestly, I think it has as much to do with the fact that he isn't Jeremy Corbyn than anything else. If you take his statement, line by line I think I come to the conclusion that it was staunch defence of the police, and a reflection that this argument detracts from the overall goal of BLM, he reflected its cultural significance and I don't think he downplayed it at all. I've listened to it again. Yes its a staunch defence of the police and his role in supporting them. He talks about the BLM Movement and the moment we're living in, and then goes onto say that its getting tangled up with organisation issues (with BLM) and he disagrees with the idea of defunding the police. Defunding the Police is a political point, not a point of morals. So in fairness, happy to debate about the politics of defunding the police but I think its unfair and inaccurate to say that he's undermining BLM. I think Defunding the Police is the wrong stance to take generally speaking and as a political Labour party policy.

What would the headline be tomorrow? "Keir Starmer wants the scrap the police"

No but then we're back full circle around the term Defund the Police which is where his fundamental objection is. You can still believe in the destination even if you don't agree with the way to get there (pardon for the s*** analogy)

I took that as him meaning that the message is being diluted because of such statements like Defund the Police

But he actually didn't say any of that. I know you don't like Keir but you're not accurately reflecting what he said.

That's not what he said - but fine

What has US cities got to do with the defunding of the police in the UK in its purest sense? Also - Answer the question was Jeremy Corbyn wrong to call for further police funding? Where the Tories right in the systemic cuts taken to the police?

He passionate disagreed with the idea of defunding the police, and positively reflected the cultural change the BLM movement is driving. What exactly where you expecting Keir to say?

I agree with what you're saying but the interpretation about what Keir said is fundamentally incorrect which is driving this discussion, and in addition we shouldn't be moving funding away from the police. Spend more money on public services, mental health provision, better jobs, better housing, but that shouldn't be at the expense (at least in this country) of moving funding away from an already stretched police force.