This is exactly it!

Arse.

Got called an "overpaid paedophile" by an angry family member as a newly qualified child protection Social Worker. I wasn't sure what level of remuneration they thought it would be appropriate for a paedophile to receive, but I didn't feel confident enough to ask.

70% of the additional spending from removing the two-child limit will go to families who are in work. This is targeting support for low-income working households who are being priced out of a decent standard of living despite doing everything asked of them.

🙄

The problem is leadership, or lack of it.

Politicians choosing to chase public opinion rather than lead it causes this. Instead of having an overarching ideology that informs policy and decisions, politicians are technocrats and lack any kind of vision.

Simply, they don't "do" anything.

He's absolutely right!

Good for him, Corbyn was “arrested for anti-apartheid activism”. Keir Starmer did legal work to bring Stephen Lawrence’s murderers to justice! It doesn’t make what he is *also* doing any better. (Or in both cases, it doesn’t make the earlier stuff any less worthwhile!)

Exactly this.

Politics should be about leadership; about being at the forefront of arguments that shape public opinion, not the other way around. Sadly, Starmer (and in fairness everyone since Blair) don't lead public opinion, they follow it.

I think I'd prefer it if a court made that determination having the benefit of the wishes and feelings of the child, if it's all the same to you.

You may think that should be the case.

The law does not necessarily agree.

You are falling into the trap of thinking that because I'm pointing out this reality, I'm arguing in defense of the father. I suggest you read more closely what I've said.

And that may be completely fair to say, but it needs to be clear that it's the child's welfare that is paramount in these considerations- that's what the law in the UK requires.

I simply cannot fathom what they think they're doing?

Do you think it's an inevitability that once they dump Starmer they'll pursue a much more progressive electoral strategy? Do you think it could work or is the damage done?

No, it isn't.

And it's one red line too many.

Never again.

The child's welfare is paramount. The argument about it being the impact upon the mother, whilst entirely understandable and something most would completely sympathise with, the child's welfare is what the court will be most concerned with. Surely the argument needs to be on that basis.

Why don't we start with safe spaces for everyone?

Such a lazy and glib response

🥱

The only opinion poll Parliament needs to be concerned with is the one that happens every five years.

If Farage wants more questions, he should do better at the next election.

Genuinely thought this was satire