Current Affairs 2017 General Election

[Walken]

It clearly should have been declared, but you're accusing the people at InnovateUK of being crooks for awarding the money to a consortium containing this company. I know many of the people that work there and they're a long way from being crooks. You'd know that if you had the first clue about how they work, but that would interfere in point scoring.

Of course, all rich people just want the best for all of us, LOLZZZZ, of course as you insinuate you know more than everyone else on here, I'm sure you went to a conference that proves as such, free market free market, Hammond is an absolute rat, self serving scum like the 99 percent of the top brass

 

[Bruce Wayne]

He didn't mate. He inferred tories are crooks, not his work colleagues.

Talk about point scoring.

Yes, and the inference was that because Hammond was an investor in this company, this had a hand in them being given the grant by Innovate, therefore as it's Innovate who actually award the money, he was inferring that they are crooks.

As I said, Hammond should have declared his interest in the company, but in my opinion there is no suggestion at all that his shareholding influenced Innovate at all.

Of course, all rich people just want the best for all of us, LOLZZZZ, of course as you insinuate you know more than everyone else on here, I'm sure you went to a conference that proves as such, free market free market, Hammond is an absolute rat, self serving scum like the 99 percent of the top brass

I know many people that work at Innovate, and know the process by which grants are made, and Hammond (or any MP) being a shareholder in the company would have had no influence at all. Stick with your dogma if you prefer though.

 

[Walken]

Yes, and the inference was that because Hammond was an investor in this company, this had a hand in them being given the grant by Innovate, therefore as it's Innovate who actually award the money, he was inferring that they are crooks.

As I said, Hammond should have declared his interest in the company, but in my opinion there is no suggestion at all that his shareholding influenced Innovate at all.



I know many people that work at Innovate, and know the process by which grants are made, and Hammond (or any MP) being a shareholder in the company would have had no influence at all. Stick with your dogma if you prefer though.

Blah blah blah, more anecdotal evidence that can't be proved, your standard defence lately

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Blah blah blah, more anecdotal evidence that can't be proved, your standard defence lately

So being completely ignorant of how Innovate distribute their grants is better than not being? Right-o.

 

[chicoazul]

Yes, and the inference was that because Hammond was an investor in this company, this had a hand in them being given the grant by Innovate, therefore as it's Innovate who actually award the money, he was inferring that they are crooks.

As I said, Hammond should have declared his interest in the company, but in my opinion there is no suggestion at all that his shareholding influenced Innovate at all.



I know many people that work at Innovate, and know the process by which grants are made, and Hammond (or any MP) being a shareholder in the company would have had no influence at all. Stick with your dogma if you prefer though.

That's some leap of faith mate.

 

[chicoazul]

Blah blah blah, more anecdotal evidence that can't be proved, your standard defence lately

My favourite rip to Bruce, as the good man himself graciously appreciates, is "go on and link me a study Bruce".

 

[Bruce Wayne]

That's some leap of faith mate.

Like I said, I know a number of people that work there, and the kind of criteria by which they make grants. I sincerely believe that this would have had no impact at all, but it isn't transparent, hence why the funding was removed.

Had it been Greg Clark it may have been different, but forgive my cynicism, I doubt most voters even know who he is.

 

[chicoazul]

Like I said, I know a number of people that work there, and the kind of criteria by which they make grants. I sincerely believe that this would have had no impact at all, but it isn't transparent, hence why the funding was removed.

Had it been Greg Clark it may have been different, but forgive my cynicism, I doubt most voters even know who he is.

Do you know them from the Masons?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Do you know them from the Masons?

They're my way into a load of cushy public sector contracts to be fair.

 

[chicoazul]

They're my way into a load of cushy public sector contracts to be fair.

Charge them £20 for breakfast toast. They'll pay it + VAT.

 

[chicoazul]

They're my way into a load of cushy public sector contracts to be fair.

Oh and LEECH ON SOCIETY.

Worse than anyone on benefits you.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Charge them £20 for breakfast toast. They'll pay it + VAT.

VAT? Is that like one of those tax things?

 

[roydo]

VAT? Is that like one of those tax things?

Tax? I remember that.

 

[chicoazul]

VAT? Is that like one of those tax things?

Haha. Get back from Monaco Tarquin lid.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Haha. Get back from Monaco Tarquin lid.

It's a dangerous place since Brexit.