Mid Worcestershire's Peter Luff tells of backlash over same-sex marriage vote

Worcester News: Peter Luff MP Peter Luff MP

FOUL “homophobic” emails and letters from people desperate to see gay marriage rejected have been sent to a Worcestershire MP.

Peter Luff, who represents Mid-Worcestershire, was also sent one note saying he is being prayed for and should “repent of his sins.”

The Conservative MP backed the bill on Wednesday, but has admitted the fall-out could impact on the number of activists prepared to campaign for the party in this year’s local elections.

“I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said.

“Some of the emails I had were really foul, absolutely. I had a fair stream of homophobic emails from people.”

The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill was approved by a majority of 225 votes despite 139 Conservative MPs voting against it.

Mr Luff added: “Personally, I think it leaves David Cameron stronger but within the party he will be damaged.

“This is not an issue a lot of supporters feel good about and it will have an impact on people who help us out in county elections - that’s where the effect will be greatest.

“As far as I am concerned I just want to put this all behind us so we can concentrate on more important subjects.

“The party and the country was divided on it along generational lines, so in that respect it was an unwelcome distraction from the challenges facing the country.”

He said once he came out in support of the bill many people contacted him to pass on their thanks.

Andrew Grant, the president of Worcester Conservatives, who was one of the fiercest critics of the bill, said: “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, so obviously I was disappointed with the outcome.

“I am very concerned (about the elections) because most people I come into contact with are those party members in the higher age group who are slogging away and putting the money up.”

Councillor Adrian Hardman, leader of Worcestershire County Council, which has elections in May, said: “We’ll have to wait and see what the impact is, but I would hope activists are sensible enough to realise they’d be campaigning on local issues.”

The bill will need to go for a third reading before the commons and then be approved by the House of Lords before it become law.

It will make gay marriage legal in any non-Church of England establishment, although other religious organisations will have the ability to ‘opt out’ of a ceremony free from the risk of legal action.

Comments (30)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:44am Thu 7 Feb 13

WhatGracieDid says...

As someone this bill actually affects, thank you to Peter Luff and Robin Walker for doing the right thing and voting in favour. This makes a difference to so many of us. Not just to those of us who are LGBT but our family and friends.

I hope they continue to keep backing this bill all the way through.
As someone this bill actually affects, thank you to Peter Luff and Robin Walker for doing the right thing and voting in favour. This makes a difference to so many of us. Not just to those of us who are LGBT but our family and friends. I hope they continue to keep backing this bill all the way through. WhatGracieDid

8:13am Thu 7 Feb 13

truth must out says...

“I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said.

Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!!
“I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said. Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!! truth must out

8:48am Thu 7 Feb 13

imustbeoldiwearacap says...

truth must out wrote:
“I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said.

Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!!
Sorry, no, the letters do not sum up the feeling of his constituents, the letters only represent those who can be bothered to write! The majority of his constituents are probably ambivalent to this piece of legislation and cannot understand all the fuss. If gays want to get married and there is protection for the church etc. then why not! Personally I wish the legislation is passed quickly so the government can get back to looking after the majority!
[quote][p][bold]truth must out[/bold] wrote: “I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said. Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!![/p][/quote]Sorry, no, the letters do not sum up the feeling of his constituents, the letters only represent those who can be bothered to write! The majority of his constituents are probably ambivalent to this piece of legislation and cannot understand all the fuss. If gays want to get married and there is protection for the church etc. then why not! Personally I wish the legislation is passed quickly so the government can get back to looking after the majority! imustbeoldiwearacap

8:49am Thu 7 Feb 13

dulon says...

Mr Luff did not need to publicise this . In my opinion it is a cheap publicity stunt to endear his party and himself to the voters . They havent exactly covered themselves in glory lately hence you wont find them tackling the hunting issue or immigration to any really effective extent .
Mr Luff did not need to publicise this . In my opinion it is a cheap publicity stunt to endear his party and himself to the voters . They havent exactly covered themselves in glory lately hence you wont find them tackling the hunting issue or immigration to any really effective extent . dulon

9:23am Thu 7 Feb 13

ushmush83 says...

Love the Christian mindset of 'gays are abhorent, agree with me or burn for eternity in damnation.' How very Christian of them.
Love the Christian mindset of 'gays are abhorent, agree with me or burn for eternity in damnation.' How very Christian of them. ushmush83

9:58am Thu 7 Feb 13

MJI says...

imustbeoldiwearacap wrote:
truth must out wrote:
“I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said.

Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!!
Sorry, no, the letters do not sum up the feeling of his constituents, the letters only represent those who can be bothered to write! The majority of his constituents are probably ambivalent to this piece of legislation and cannot understand all the fuss. If gays want to get married and there is protection for the church etc. then why not! Personally I wish the legislation is passed quickly so the government can get back to looking after the majority!
Exactly like the vast majority, I don't actually care either way as it does not effect me either way, but I do feel most of the anti people are insecure. And I am glad the churches are not being forced.
.
As I have said before the economy is the priority and Cameron needs to stop giving away so much of our money when he is cutting back so much at home.
.
I am pleased though that the MPs voted according to their own thoughts rather than let a few people bully them.
[quote][p][bold]imustbeoldiwearacap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]truth must out[/bold] wrote: “I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said. Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!![/p][/quote]Sorry, no, the letters do not sum up the feeling of his constituents, the letters only represent those who can be bothered to write! The majority of his constituents are probably ambivalent to this piece of legislation and cannot understand all the fuss. If gays want to get married and there is protection for the church etc. then why not! Personally I wish the legislation is passed quickly so the government can get back to looking after the majority![/p][/quote]Exactly like the vast majority, I don't actually care either way as it does not effect me either way, but I do feel most of the anti people are insecure. And I am glad the churches are not being forced. . As I have said before the economy is the priority and Cameron needs to stop giving away so much of our money when he is cutting back so much at home. . I am pleased though that the MPs voted according to their own thoughts rather than let a few people bully them. MJI

10:02am Thu 7 Feb 13

MJI says...

WhatGracieDid wrote:
As someone this bill actually affects, thank you to Peter Luff and Robin Walker for doing the right thing and voting in favour. This makes a difference to so many of us. Not just to those of us who are LGBT but our family and friends.

I hope they continue to keep backing this bill all the way through.
It is now up to the House of Lords, but they do tend to think things through properly.
.
I hope for your sake it comes through for you. As a not bothered I feel there is enough protection for the religious organisations.
[quote][p][bold]WhatGracieDid[/bold] wrote: As someone this bill actually affects, thank you to Peter Luff and Robin Walker for doing the right thing and voting in favour. This makes a difference to so many of us. Not just to those of us who are LGBT but our family and friends. I hope they continue to keep backing this bill all the way through.[/p][/quote]It is now up to the House of Lords, but they do tend to think things through properly. . I hope for your sake it comes through for you. As a not bothered I feel there is enough protection for the religious organisations. MJI

10:26am Thu 7 Feb 13

More Tea Vicar says...

I think I am with the majority in saying that

a - I have no strong views one way or the other regarding gay marriage (Mr Luff is talking about a very small number of people)

b - if anything, on a personal level, I am for rather than against

but

c - there are practical issues, notably a potential 'clash of rights', that can't be ignored (the gay 'right' to get married in a religion which might claim the 'right' not to be forced to participate)

d - this wasn't in the Tory manifesto

e - no disrespect to anyone with strong opinions on the matter, but the economy is at risk, the country is at war, borders are out of control, the main parties are committed to paving over the countryside, the NHS needs sorting.....why the emphasis on THIS, of all issues? As the small number of people mentioned by Mr Luff indicates,this is not a 'burning issue' for most people.
I think I am with the majority in saying that a - I have no strong views one way or the other regarding gay marriage (Mr Luff is talking about a very small number of people) b - if anything, on a personal level, I am for rather than against but c - there are practical issues, notably a potential 'clash of rights', that can't be ignored (the gay 'right' to get married in a religion which might claim the 'right' not to be forced to participate) d - this wasn't in the Tory manifesto e - no disrespect to anyone with strong opinions on the matter, but the economy is at risk, the country is at war, borders are out of control, the main parties are committed to paving over the countryside, the NHS needs sorting.....why the emphasis on THIS, of all issues? As the small number of people mentioned by Mr Luff indicates,this is not a 'burning issue' for most people. More Tea Vicar

10:43am Thu 7 Feb 13

Jabbadad says...

Criticism against Peter Luff would have been better aimed at his time spent at the MOD and placing orders for troop supplies to European Firms when our own manufacturers were closing down due to being starved of MOD orders.
Criticism against Peter Luff would have been better aimed at his time spent at the MOD and placing orders for troop supplies to European Firms when our own manufacturers were closing down due to being starved of MOD orders. Jabbadad

11:04am Thu 7 Feb 13

Jabbadad says...

Oh and just a further little criticism for placing orders worth £452 millions for ships to South Korea, when our own shipyards stand idle with thousands out of work.
Oh and just a further little criticism for placing orders worth £452 millions for ships to South Korea, when our own shipyards stand idle with thousands out of work. Jabbadad

11:49am Thu 7 Feb 13

Mary79 says...

the gay marriage vote had the right outcome in the end no thanks to a lot of tory mp's.

why should any tory mp care about our economy or uk jobs? they are in favour of limited rights for uk workers and support global capitalism because thats how these idiots make their own money - at our expense. get real or better still stop voting for them.
the gay marriage vote had the right outcome in the end no thanks to a lot of tory mp's. why should any tory mp care about our economy or uk jobs? they are in favour of limited rights for uk workers and support global capitalism because thats how these idiots make their own money - at our expense. get real or better still stop voting for them. Mary79

1:25pm Thu 7 Feb 13

More Tea Vicar says...

Mary79 wrote:
the gay marriage vote had the right outcome in the end no thanks to a lot of tory mp's.

why should any tory mp care about our economy or uk jobs? they are in favour of limited rights for uk workers and support global capitalism because thats how these idiots make their own money - at our expense. get real or better still stop voting for them.
The left would have more of a chance of looking convincing on that if it hadn't been so vociferous in supporting mass immigration - which has done so much to drop wages and conditions, and limit people's chances of ever finding employment.

The left spent years telling calling working class people who resented having to compete for jobs, wages and services with immigrants racist and stupid.

They have no right to claim to care now.
[quote][p][bold]Mary79[/bold] wrote: the gay marriage vote had the right outcome in the end no thanks to a lot of tory mp's. why should any tory mp care about our economy or uk jobs? they are in favour of limited rights for uk workers and support global capitalism because thats how these idiots make their own money - at our expense. get real or better still stop voting for them.[/p][/quote]The left would have more of a chance of looking convincing on that if it hadn't been so vociferous in supporting mass immigration - which has done so much to drop wages and conditions, and limit people's chances of ever finding employment. The left spent years telling calling working class people who resented having to compete for jobs, wages and services with immigrants racist and stupid. They have no right to claim to care now. More Tea Vicar

1:57pm Thu 7 Feb 13

green49 says...

truth must out says...
8:13am Thu 7 Feb 13
Mr Luff;
“I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said.

Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!!

Quite agree with this, i am not bothered either way but as
More Tea Vicar says...
10:26am Thu 7 Feb 1

This wasn't in the Tory manifesto

No disrespect to anyone with strong opinions on the matter, but the economy is at risk, the country is at war, borders are out of control, the main parties are committed to paving over the countryside, the NHS needs sorting.....why the emphasis on THIS, of all issues?

Because it's Camerons morons who are using this as a diversion to whats really important to the majority in this country.
truth must out says... 8:13am Thu 7 Feb 13 Mr Luff; “I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said. Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!! Quite agree with this, i am not bothered either way but as More Tea Vicar says... 10:26am Thu 7 Feb 1 This wasn't in the Tory manifesto No disrespect to anyone with strong opinions on the matter, but the economy is at risk, the country is at war, borders are out of control, the main parties are committed to paving over the countryside, the NHS needs sorting.....why the emphasis on THIS, of all issues? Because it's Camerons morons who are using this as a diversion to whats really important to the majority in this country. green49

2:53pm Thu 7 Feb 13

RobynN_WR says...

green49 wrote:
truth must out says...
8:13am Thu 7 Feb 13
Mr Luff;
“I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said.

Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!!

Quite agree with this, i am not bothered either way but as
More Tea Vicar says...
10:26am Thu 7 Feb 1

This wasn't in the Tory manifesto

No disrespect to anyone with strong opinions on the matter, but the economy is at risk, the country is at war, borders are out of control, the main parties are committed to paving over the countryside, the NHS needs sorting.....why the emphasis on THIS, of all issues?

Because it's Camerons morons who are using this as a diversion to whats really important to the majority in this country.
On the manifesto point, yes it was.

Three days before the 2010 general election, the Tories published their contract for equality. The then shadow Home Secretary announced it.

Page 14 announces their intention to allow same-sex couples to marry. This policy was not foisted on the government as part of the coalition government.
[quote][p][bold]green49[/bold] wrote: truth must out says... 8:13am Thu 7 Feb 13 Mr Luff; “I had around 200 letters and emails and 80 or 90 per cent were opposed to it,” he said. Perhaps that sums up the feeling of the constituents you are supposed to represent in this democratic country..!! Quite agree with this, i am not bothered either way but as More Tea Vicar says... 10:26am Thu 7 Feb 1 This wasn't in the Tory manifesto No disrespect to anyone with strong opinions on the matter, but the economy is at risk, the country is at war, borders are out of control, the main parties are committed to paving over the countryside, the NHS needs sorting.....why the emphasis on THIS, of all issues? Because it's Camerons morons who are using this as a diversion to whats really important to the majority in this country.[/p][/quote]On the manifesto point, yes it was. Three days before the 2010 general election, the Tories published their contract for equality. The then shadow Home Secretary announced it. Page 14 announces their intention to allow same-sex couples to marry. This policy was not foisted on the government as part of the coalition government. RobynN_WR

2:57pm Thu 7 Feb 13

green49 says...

3 days before the election that slipped under the radar then, good luck to you if you wanted it, i don't care either way but there are more things on the list that needed sorting first.
3 days before the election that slipped under the radar then, good luck to you if you wanted it, i don't care either way but there are more things on the list that needed sorting first. green49

3:06pm Thu 7 Feb 13

More Tea Vicar says...

green49 wrote:
3 days before the election that slipped under the radar then, good luck to you if you wanted it, i don't care either way but there are more things on the list that needed sorting first.
...well said.

And I've heard a lot of commentators, including Tories, none of whom seemed to regard this as a manifesto commitment.

That's the problem with elections sometimes. We 'buy' the whole package, electing in the party we generally prefer, or at least dislike least.

People will have voted Tory expecting them to get the economy back up and running, cut government spending and waste, deal with the EU, immigration etc. Or just because they'd had enough of Labour.

Whether you agree with those policies is neither here nor there. Gay marriage issue is a major government policy commitment. Again, whether you agree with it is neither here nor there.

The point is, it was not flagged up as Tory policy. Personally, I don't regard it as a big issue. But for some people, it clearly is.
[quote][p][bold]green49[/bold] wrote: 3 days before the election that slipped under the radar then, good luck to you if you wanted it, i don't care either way but there are more things on the list that needed sorting first.[/p][/quote]...well said. And I've heard a lot of commentators, including Tories, none of whom seemed to regard this as a manifesto commitment. That's the problem with elections sometimes. We 'buy' the whole package, electing in the party we generally prefer, or at least dislike least. People will have voted Tory expecting them to get the economy back up and running, cut government spending and waste, deal with the EU, immigration etc. Or just because they'd had enough of Labour. Whether you agree with those policies is neither here nor there. Gay marriage issue is a major government policy commitment. Again, whether you agree with it is neither here nor there. The point is, it was not flagged up as Tory policy. Personally, I don't regard it as a big issue. But for some people, it clearly is. More Tea Vicar

3:48pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Jabbadad says...

Why have all the postings been removed from this topic?
Why have all the postings been removed from this topic? Jabbadad

3:50pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Jabbadad says...

Oh Dear it's my error again.
Oh Dear it's my error again. Jabbadad

4:08pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Jabbadad says...

Now and again politicians pull a brilliant political stroke, and sadly for those from the LGBT they are the victims being used in this plot, which has infuriated lot's of people who otherwise would have been most likely to have welcomed such a delicate issue had it not turned into a political farce.
In a stroke the Tories are absolutely in a monumental political stinker of a situation, whereby party members who opposed the Bill are furious and threatening to withdraw their support, the don't knows who are now annoyed won't vote for them, New Labour who have a following who don't always address such issues and will vote for them what may, and then the LIB / LAB / CON / DEMS who even within their own party are now the political Lepers.
So we have seen a political master stroke which is being played at the community acceptance (did not say Legal) cost of the LGBT.
For Cameron and the Tories to survive will take a miracle, and he desperately needs new advisers, since the ones he has are so far detached from the reality of the UK people, they must come from Mars.
Now and again politicians pull a brilliant political stroke, and sadly for those from the LGBT they are the victims being used in this plot, which has infuriated lot's of people who otherwise would have been most likely to have welcomed such a delicate issue had it not turned into a political farce. In a stroke the Tories are absolutely in a monumental political stinker of a situation, whereby party members who opposed the Bill are furious and threatening to withdraw their support, the don't knows who are now annoyed won't vote for them, New Labour who have a following who don't always address such issues and will vote for them what may, and then the LIB / LAB / CON / DEMS who even within their own party are now the political Lepers. So we have seen a political master stroke which is being played at the community acceptance (did not say Legal) cost of the LGBT. For Cameron and the Tories to survive will take a miracle, and he desperately needs new advisers, since the ones he has are so far detached from the reality of the UK people, they must come from Mars. Jabbadad

4:14pm Thu 7 Feb 13

TDH123 says...

Mary79 wrote:
the gay marriage vote had the right outcome in the end no thanks to a lot of tory mp's.

why should any tory mp care about our economy or uk jobs? they are in favour of limited rights for uk workers and support global capitalism because thats how these idiots make their own money - at our expense. get real or better still stop voting for them.
The gay marriage vote "had the right outcome". " . . That is how these idiots make their own money". How simplistic and subjective! Should you not be practising what you preach and providing evidence of your assertions?
[quote][p][bold]Mary79[/bold] wrote: the gay marriage vote had the right outcome in the end no thanks to a lot of tory mp's. why should any tory mp care about our economy or uk jobs? they are in favour of limited rights for uk workers and support global capitalism because thats how these idiots make their own money - at our expense. get real or better still stop voting for them.[/p][/quote]The gay marriage vote "had the right outcome". " . . That is how these idiots make their own money". How simplistic and subjective! Should you not be practising what you preach and providing evidence of your assertions? TDH123

4:39pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Ron Payne says...

Yet another no matter issue used to turn attention away from the state of the economy. These people should realise just how much they have been used. Do they think MPs really care.?
Yet another no matter issue used to turn attention away from the state of the economy. These people should realise just how much they have been used. Do they think MPs really care.? Ron Payne

5:49pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Omicron says...

Peter Luff no longer cares if he upsets anyone as he will be retiring from politics at the next general election.
With regards to him receiving nasty emails he's a politician for goodness sake. He must receive hundreds, if not thousands, of nasty emails and correspondence every year.
Peter Luff no longer cares if he upsets anyone as he will be retiring from politics at the next general election. With regards to him receiving nasty emails he's a politician for goodness sake. He must receive hundreds, if not thousands, of nasty emails and correspondence every year. Omicron

6:15pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Tony Pingree says...

I don't care about politicians.

But this one has contributed toward something decent.

I still won't vote for him though.
I don't care about politicians. But this one has contributed toward something decent. I still won't vote for him though. Tony Pingree

6:55pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Busymum2011 says...

I suspect the 80 - 90% of emails he has received objecting to his vote, are due to the fact that most people can only be bothered to make contact when they've got something to complain about. I'm sure the majority are on his 'side', as I definitely am. Good for him! :D
I suspect the 80 - 90% of emails he has received objecting to his vote, are due to the fact that most people can only be bothered to make contact when they've got something to complain about. I'm sure the majority are on his 'side', as I definitely am. Good for him! :D Busymum2011

10:19pm Thu 7 Feb 13

Lew Smoralz says...

Voting for the act won't have hurt our members chances of elevation to the House of Lords one little bit.

Not that I am suggesting he would have let such a consideration influence him in any way. ;
Voting for the act won't have hurt our members chances of elevation to the House of Lords one little bit. Not that I am suggesting he would have let such a consideration influence him in any way. ; Lew Smoralz

11:37pm Thu 7 Feb 13

RobertR says...

I've emailed peter luff about this subject and was rather disappointed by his stance. He is voted by his constituents to represent them in Parliament why does he not do this?. I agree with civil partnerships but it should apply to both gay and hetro couples, the gay media has a very strong lobby.
I've emailed peter luff about this subject and was rather disappointed by his stance. He is voted by his constituents to represent them in Parliament why does he not do this?. I agree with civil partnerships but it should apply to both gay and hetro couples, the gay media has a very strong lobby. RobertR

1:56pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Elgol2012 says...

Does anyone really think that manifestos are worth the paper they're written on? Think of all the things which have been promised in mainfestos that haven't happened over the years!

As I'm not religious, I'm ambivalent about the main topic being discussed.
Does anyone really think that manifestos are worth the paper they're written on? Think of all the things which have been promised in mainfestos that haven't happened over the years! As I'm not religious, I'm ambivalent about the main topic being discussed. Elgol2012

6:36pm Fri 8 Feb 13

SgtAl says...

Jabbadad, I apologise for picking up on one of your comments that is unrelated to the story, however, perhaps orders for Military equipment have gone overseas in order to ensure better value for (our, the taxpayer) money. After all, would you insist on paying £2 for a loaf of bread from your local bakery if you could get the exact same quality product for 62p from Tesco?

If you do I'm sure you must have to burn your money at the end of the month as you simply have too much.
Jabbadad, I apologise for picking up on one of your comments that is unrelated to the story, however, perhaps orders for Military equipment have gone overseas in order to ensure better value for (our, the taxpayer) money. After all, would you insist on paying £2 for a loaf of bread from your local bakery if you could get the exact same quality product for 62p from Tesco? If you do I'm sure you must have to burn your money at the end of the month as you simply have too much. SgtAl

8:51pm Sat 9 Feb 13

RogerLFC says...

“As far as I am concerned I just want to put this all behind us so we can concentrate on more important subjects.' ..... 'It will make gay marriage legal in any non-Church of England establishment, although other religious organisations will have the ability to ‘opt out’ of a ceremony free from the risk of legal action.' ~ so just a stunt I think!
“As far as I am concerned I just want to put this all behind us so we can concentrate on more important subjects.' ..... 'It will make gay marriage legal in any non-Church of England establishment, although other religious organisations will have the ability to ‘opt out’ of a ceremony free from the risk of legal action.' ~ so just a stunt I think! RogerLFC

1:52am Mon 11 Feb 13

Brummagem Bertie says...

SgtAl wrote:
Jabbadad, I apologise for picking up on one of your comments that is unrelated to the story, however, perhaps orders for Military equipment have gone overseas in order to ensure better value for (our, the taxpayer) money. After all, would you insist on paying £2 for a loaf of bread from your local bakery if you could get the exact same quality product for 62p from Tesco?

If you do I'm sure you must have to burn your money at the end of the month as you simply have too much.
SgtAl, if you also had to pay £1.75 for each loaf you bought from Tesco to support the now unemployed local bakery workers, make up for the business rates and other taxes that the local bakery was no longer paying, and compensate for the profit on the loaf being redirected to a tax haven rather than being reinvested in the local economy, the £2 starts to look very good value for money.
[quote][p][bold]SgtAl[/bold] wrote: Jabbadad, I apologise for picking up on one of your comments that is unrelated to the story, however, perhaps orders for Military equipment have gone overseas in order to ensure better value for (our, the taxpayer) money. After all, would you insist on paying £2 for a loaf of bread from your local bakery if you could get the exact same quality product for 62p from Tesco? If you do I'm sure you must have to burn your money at the end of the month as you simply have too much.[/p][/quote]SgtAl, if you also had to pay £1.75 for each loaf you bought from Tesco to support the now unemployed local bakery workers, make up for the business rates and other taxes that the local bakery was no longer paying, and compensate for the profit on the loaf being redirected to a tax haven rather than being reinvested in the local economy, the £2 starts to look very good value for money. Brummagem Bertie

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree