Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About grrclark

  • Rank

  • Birthday 06/06/1972

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • From
    Fife, Scotland

Recent Profile Visitors

1,081 profile views
  1. Starling are a fully regulated and proper grown up bank, the individuals behind have a good banking history too. I think they offer a great service. Download the app, follow the process to get setup and in 2-3 days you’ll have a business account setup and your bank card in hand. All done on your mobile.
  2. I recently moved to the internet bank Starling for my business account. Zero bank charges, an excellent online banking experience, trouble free to setup and integrates seamlessly with my finance system. Prior to that i used TSB and they were expensive, slow and unreliable. Just noticed you needed a presence to pay cash in so it may rule Starling out, all my business is done via invoice and electronic payment. They may have a partnership with somebody else like the Post Office, I don’t know.
  3. It’s behind a pay wall unfortunately. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/66b32f98-dfdf-11e9-8221-1b98fc56091e Article re: my comments previously. Scary!
  4. Perhaps the scariest motion voted on at the conference, that is suggested as looking likely to be adopted as a manifesto pledge, was to extend freedom of movement beyond just that of EU member states; to allow all UK residents a national vote i.e. anybody of any nationality who happens to stay here; to give settled status to all refugees (and the vote) and to remove caps in immigration. Only slightly behind on the scary scale that was a vote at conference was to implement policy to fix house prices and for mandatory purchase by the state of empty housing, i.e with no permanent residency.
  5. I find the parcours really flighty, a couple of friends have them and they are really fast handling guns. Way too quick for my style of shooting. As Figgy said the K80 ss v the parcour is chalk and cheese. Another friend has the super sporter and it handles in a way that is more suited to me, but they are fugly things. It really is all down to what is right for you and your style of shooting.
  6. There are different rules in doing a business to business transaction rather than a consumer transaction.
  7. Magic Grandpa strikes again...
  8. grrclark


    I suspect a single agenda issue of another referendum would be enough to galvanise them. Despite the LibDem position of revoke they are still supporting another referendum until a GE. Labour’s position is another referendum. The independents all support another referendum. SNP will also support another referendum. So for the rebel alliance why not let the government stumble on in dealing with business as usual, defeat any substantive government bills and enact primary legislation for a 2nd referendum with no deal or revoke? Will BoJo try and have a Queen’s speech when he has no chance of getting anything remotely contentious voted through. No matter what happens from now on in the political landscape of this country is irrevocably changed and i think the 2 party system is finished. We will be like so many other countries and rely on coalitions. That will moderate any extremes, but also inhibit disruptive change and we will slowly lurch into impotent mediocrity, hogtied and moribund by our own aching conscience and hand wringing in trying to appease everyone and offend no one. Until there is a war of course.
  9. grrclark


    I’m not so sure Rob. It is entirely possible that the “rebel alliance” could try to enact primary legislation under standing order 24, which Bercow has said he will allow, to legislate for let’s say a second referendum. The rebel alliance could keep the Conservative government in situ, with no majority and no ability to conduct business whilst they effectively run a government of national unity, without it actually being so. If Bercow continues to permit the use of standing orders and humble addresses they could call the shots and mandate the executive to do what they wish. They have been openly prepared to act in the face of the electorate to stymy Brexit already, despite fallacious argument to the contrary, so why not continue in that theme to stymy a GE? Of course Boris could prorogue again for 4-6 days purely for the Queen’s speech, which couldn’t be challenged, that would then get rid of Bercow earlier than the 31st and mix things up a wee bit more.
  10. grrclark


    I don’t believe that I could ever further an argument to remove any doubts of partiality on behalf of the judges, but 11 supreme justices reaching a unanimous outcome should really put that doubt beyond reach. Have the judges strayed into the political space? I think advocates going forward will argue both sides of that question and I think hereafter we will see more litigious actions around political decision, the first Millar case opened that box. It isn’t completely without precedent though, there have been cases in Scotland that i’m aware of, i’m sure there has been in England & Wales too. Obviously not quite the same. I wish we could have legal recourse to challenge the parliamentarians that I believe are acting mendaciously, but sadly it seems that the parliament is subject to less scrutiny via the courts than the executive; unless of course in the case of the EU Withdrawal Bill 2 (The Benn Bill) when parliament took control of proceedings and that could be subject to judicial appeal should you feel strongly enough about it, had sufficient cause to challenge it and had deep enough pockets to fund it. I should add, being denied a direct opportunity to hold those parliamentarians to account via a GE is, I think, the greatest insult to our democracy so virtuously defended by those sovereign parliamentarians who are denying us that choice. Hypocrites one and all who voted against. The FTPA is and was an act of democratic vandalism.
  11. grrclark


    That’s not wholly accurate. Part of our legal system is based on precedent, but precedent is not absolute, i.e. precedent can be established and followed in a lower court, but over ruled by a higher court and there is no absolute need for precedent to exist to pass a judgement. The Inner House of the Court of Session had already ruled in favour of the claimants, the Supreme Court upheld that. With 11 supreme judges arriving at a unanimous outcome I don’t think we can possibly level any accusation of impropriety towards them. They have made a reasoned judgement based on the evidence presented and their learned interpretation of the law, not simply opinion. The same level of propriety cannot be considered of all those who oppose Brexit however and no matter of meretricious argument or sophistry disguises the truth that there is a concerted campaign to oppose the outcome of the referendum at all costs. In this case Boris has had a significant lapse of judgement or received ill considered advice. I don’t think it merits him resigning however as that would not advance the country in any way just now. The opposition need to support a call for a general election though and let the voters make their decision on the suitability of the bufoon. (He will get the highest voter share all the same, but will it bring a majority?)
  12. The £600m number is not what the cost to UK tax payer will be, it is around £100m. The £200m was what their banks asked for to support the business until the Chinese investor/largest shareholder ponied up with another £800m. The Chinese investor may not have added to their holding at all. As Mick said, the debt of TC amounted to £2bn. The UK taxpayer share of the total bill is small (relatively) compared to what will be spent by those you reference.
  13. This. Thomas Cook have been dreadfully managed and the acute problems have been telegraphed since 2011 at least. Also market conditions offer very similar challenges that caused BHS to go pear shaped, why most of Philip Green’s empire is crumbling and why M&S are very soon going to end up on the critical care list. John Lewis are drifting towards that zone too.
  • Create New...