Richard Bacon MP

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Go pleasure your pigs whilst you still can, Richard. Mind, since your fellow Tory resigned after watching red tractors and **** whilst sitting in the HoC, your red tractor campaign seems to have stalled somewhat.

[Rock The Boat 1,323]

On 05/02/2022 at 21:24, nevermind, neoliberalism has had it said:

why should that be necessary? I am not swearing an oath on a rotten monarchy, why should nationality matter if people can live peacefully in each others country, pay taxes, have families and children who pay taxes and have been born here as UK Citizens?

Is it those opulent sums they demand for a piece of paper? Thanks for asking but I'm ok at present, but many children and families are not.

I'm not 100% sure what the rules are but would it not disqualify you from a state pension and other benefits if you don't have citizenship?

[horsefly 4,273]

I don't want to worry you guys but I think the Apocalypse may be impending. Fatty Bacon has for the first time responded to one of my emails (the one I copied above). Here it is in full:

"Thank you for your email about my recent comments in an interview on Look East.

I pointed out that NHS workers were in some cases working 24/7 and I was certainly not intending to insult anyone so I am very sorry if anyone got that impression. NHS staff worked extremely hard throughout the pandemic.

I will try to choose my words with greater care in future."

So, not actually sorry at all for what he said then. Only sorry that foolish people like me, my partner, and probably every NHS worker in the country, were stupid enough to be insulted by his exhortation to the BBC to go and find examples of NHS workers partying, instead of holding Johnson and the No.10 lawbreakers to account. I get the feeling he must be using the same PR agent as Preeti Patel.

 

[dylanisabaddog 4,846]

On 15/10/2021 at 10:13, horsefly said:

Sadly Richard Bacon knows that South Norfolk is an effective sinecure. For the last two years his single-page website has displayed the following message:

Please note that my full website is currently undergoing reconstruction.

So, during a period when communication with his constituents has been absolutely vital he has not made the slightest effort to repair his website and provide crucial information about Covid etc. Just how hard is it to repair a website? Checking randomly on other MP's websites one finds them filled with multiple pages of info and links.

Worse still, he has not replied to a single email I have sent to him, nor to those of anyone that I know (including an ex-fire chief). Yet he claims full administration expenses and just about every expense going. In any other context the man would be sacked for a complete dereliction of duty. 

I would be interested to hear of anyone else's experience of this remarkably lazy politician.

I'm up early and just heard the result from Tiverton. I know it was a by election in uncertain times but it shows that it's possible for Bacon to lose his seat. Having said that, I can't believe that the Tories will select him again 

[horsefly 4,273]

17 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I'm up early and just heard the result from Tiverton. I know it was a by election in uncertain times but it shows that it's possible for Bacon to lose his seat. Having said that, I can't believe that the Tories will select him again 

Yep! That amazing result means there is no longer any such thing as a safe Tory seat. Hopefully the public will now realise the power of tactical voting. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,846]

2 hours ago, horsefly said:

Yep! That amazing result means there is no longer any such thing as a safe Tory seat. Hopefully the public will now realise the power of tactical voting. 

The really encouraging thing is that the voters worked this out for themselves. 

If we can persuade 8,000 Lib Dems in South Norfolk that they're wasting their vote who knows what is possible. That assumes that Starmer or someone like him remains in control of the Labour Party. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

2 hours ago, horsefly said:

Yep! That amazing result means there is no longer any such thing as a safe Tory seat. Hopefully the public will now realise the power of tactical voting. 

Yep, makes a nice change to hear some good news about the Tory party 😀😀

[horsefly 4,273]

3 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

The really encouraging thing is that the voters worked this out for themselves. 

If we can persuade 8,000 Lib Dems in South Norfolk that they're wasting their vote who knows what is possible. That assumes that Starmer or someone like him remains in control of the Labour Party. 

Yep! I shall be emailing Fatty Bacon today to point out the very real prospect that tactical voting will see the end of his utterly feckless sinecure.

[horsefly 4,273]

Just emailed fatty Bacon the following:

To:

Richard Bacon

 

For the last three years I have sent you countless emails asking for an explanation for why your single page website has displayed the following message: 

Please note that my full website is now under reconstruction and will be launched soon.

I have yet to receive a single reply to any of those emails. So I ask again for an explanation regarding why you have failed to provide a website facilitating essential communication with the constituents you claim to represent. The fact that during the entirety of the Covid crisis you were unable to provide essential government information via your website is indicative of your astonishingly poor performance as an MP. This has recently been very clearly exposed by many adverse articles in the local press and on regional news. I hope you are watching the news this morning and are aware that no Tory seat can now be regarded as a safe seat. For too long you have relied on the assumption that your paltry performance as an MP, and lack of presence in the constituency would be no obstacle to your re-election. Tiverton should hopefully shock you out of that lazy assumption.

 

I, of course, expect no response to this email given past experience. However, in a spirit of generosity I will finish by taking the opportunity to ask you a question you may find more manageable: would you please indicate and explain the time span covered by your phrase, "launched soon". Currently "launched soon" has covered a delay of three years, can we expect another three years to elapse and still find ourselves reading the same message?

[dylanisabaddog 4,846]

4 hours ago, horsefly said:

Yep! I shall be emailing Fatty Bacon today to point out the very real prospect that tactical voting will see the end of his utterly feckless sinecure.

 

3 hours ago, horsefly said:

Just emailed fatty Bacon the following:

To:

Richard Bacon

 

For the last three years I have sent you countless emails asking for an explanation for why your single page website has displayed the following message: 

Please note that my full website is now under reconstruction and will be launched soon.

I have yet to receive a single reply to any of those emails. So I ask again for an explanation regarding why you have failed to provide a website facilitating essential communication with the constituents you claim to represent. The fact that during the entirety of the Covid crisis you were unable to provide essential government information via your website is indicative of your astonishingly poor performance as an MP. This has recently been very clearly exposed by many adverse articles in the local press and on regional news. I hope you are watching the news this morning and are aware that no Tory seat can now be regarded as a safe seat. For too long you have relied on the assumption that your paltry performance as an MP, and lack of presence in the constituency would be no obstacle to your re-election. Tiverton should hopefully shock you out of that lazy assumption.

 

I, of course, expect no response to this email given past experience. However, in a spirit of generosity I will finish by taking the opportunity to ask you a question you may find more manageable: would you please indicate and explain the time span covered by your phrase, "launched soon". Currently "launched soon" has covered a delay of three years, can we expect another three years to elapse and still find ourselves reading the same message?

Just a guess but think there's a small possibility he may not reply. 

I heard a Tory MP on the radio this morning say that he'd already been reselected for the next election. I've no idea how the Tories work. Does this mean that they've all been through the selection process already? 

Labour has a very slim chance in South Norfolk if - 

—Bacon is selected 

—The Lib Dems lend us their votes 

—Labour picks the right candidate 

The last of those three is sadly the most unlikely but all that the Conservatives really need to do is pick an inoffensive candidate with a pretty and dutiful wife and 'nice' children. 

 

 

[benchwarmer 624]

3 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

 

Labour has a very slim chance in South Norfolk if - 

—Bacon is selected 

—The Lib Dems lend us their votes 

—Labour picks the right candidate 

 

Come on.  The Lib Dems have a better chance in South Norfolk than Labour because they're more likely to pick up disgruntled Tory votes.  That's how Tiverton and Honiton was won, and South Norfolk has a similar demographic.

Edited June 24, 2022 by benchwarmer

[Rock The Boat 1,323]

52 minutes ago, benchwarmer said:

Come on.  The Lib Dems have a better chance in South Norfolk than Labour because they're more likely to pick up disgruntled Tory votes.  That's how Tiverton and Honiton was won, and South Norfolk has a similar demographic.

Quite. I'm not sure what Labour is getting excited about. It's looking much better for Lib Dems. 

[horsefly 4,273]

Frankly it doesn't really matter. The South Norfolk constituency just needs advising who is most likely to win the seat from the Tories and we can all pile in on that option. The Lib Dems winning seats from the Tories will be crucial to Labour winning an overall GE. Once that is done, some system of PR can be brought forward and we may never see another Tory government again.

[horsefly 4,273]

15 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

Quite. I'm not sure what Labour is getting excited about. It's looking much better for Lib Dems. 

Lib Dems will never win a general election, but them winning seats from the Tories will be crucial to Labour winning the next GE. So there's plenty for Labour to get excited about in Lib Dem successes against the Tories.

[dylanisabaddog 4,846]

1 hour ago, benchwarmer said:

Come on.  The Lib Dems have a better chance in South Norfolk than Labour because they're more likely to pick up disgruntled Tory votes.  That's how Tiverton and Honiton was won, and South Norfolk has a similar demographic.

Really? Beth Jones was a hopeless candidate and still hammered the Lib Dems 

 

[benchwarmer 624]

49 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Lib Dems will never win a general election, but them winning seats from the Tories will be crucial to Labour winning the next GE. So there's plenty for Labour to get excited about in Lib Dem successes against the Tories.

If Labour won the most seats but had no overall majority, and the Lib Dems or SNP were the only coalition partners, I wonder what they would do . . .

[benchwarmer 624]

46 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Really? Beth Jones was a hopeless candidate and still hammered the Lib Dems 

 

The Lib Dems were a fairly distant third in Tiverton and Honiton in 2019.  Times have changed.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

'Times have changed'. What makes you think it has? and is this change for the better? In 1970 we had no food banks, now we have over 1700 and child poverty as inflation is at an all time high.

I hope we can persuade Rwanda to keep hold of Boris for the rest of the year, we can't take his schizoid narcissist daily lies anymore. 

 

Edited June 24, 2022 by nevermind, neoliberalism has had it

[Rock The Boat 1,323]

On 24/06/2022 at 21:42, nevermind, neoliberalism has had it said:

'Times have changed'. What makes you think it has? and is this change for the better? In 1970 we had no food banks, now we have over 1700 and child poverty as inflation is at an all time high.

I hope we can persuade Rwanda to keep hold of Boris for the rest of the year, we can't take his schizoid narcissist daily lies anymore. 

 

Personally, I would consider the number of food banks to be an indicator of greater resource distribution between rich and poor and therefore an improvement on 1970 where the poorest would have just gone hungry. I hope you are not going to argue that we had a higher standard of living in 1970, because we didn't. 

[Rock The Boat 1,323]

On 24/06/2022 at 17:41, horsefly said:

Lib Dems will never win a general election, but them winning seats from the Tories will be crucial to Labour winning the next GE. So there's plenty for Labour to get excited about in Lib Dem successes against the Tories.

That would be true if Labour was polling well but at the moment they aren't. There is still a big doubt in voters minds about what a Labour government would look like and that's why LibDems and Greens are polling well. The FPTP system makes it difficult for LDs to turn votes into seats, I grant you. But there is a point where they gain mass and it flips, so to speak. I'm not sure if we aren't so far away from that critical point. 

[horsefly 4,273]

10 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

That would be true if Labour was polling well but at the moment they aren't. There is still a big doubt in voters minds about what a Labour government would look like and that's why LibDems and Greens are polling well. The FPTP system makes it difficult for LDs to turn votes into seats, I grant you. But there is a point where they gain mass and it flips, so to speak. I'm not sure if we aren't so far away from that critical point. 

Oh dear! Labour are polling well above the Tories, and even more so when it comes to the LibDems, and the Greens. A little bit of  psephology would soon disabuse you of the idea that any party other than Labour could gain more seats than the Tories in a general election.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

On 29/06/2022 at 11:00, Rock The Boat said:

Personally, I would consider the number of food banks to be an indicator of greater resource distribution between rich and poor and therefore an improvement on 1970 where the poorest would have just gone hungry. I hope you are not going to argue that we had a higher standard of living in 1970, because we didn't. 

thanks for your personal opinion. I do not agree. the gap between rich and poor has increased and to say that charity should be alleviating poverty the Tories 'achieved' ,according to your opinion, is vitue signalling of the worst kind. Sheltered as you are in a prosperous eastern region, selectively informed by a media that is not only biased but dangerously colluding on breaches of the law, you have no measure of reality.

[horsefly 4,273]

Fatty Bacon continues to be one of the laziest MPs ever to disgrace the House of Commons. It took him over three years to fulfil a promise to complete the "re-construction" of his one-page website. That reconstruction consisted of uploading eight trivial comments. That's it! He can't even be bothered to remove or update his glowing welcome to our new PM Liz Truss:

http://www.richardbacon.org.uk/

[TheGunnShow 5,909]

He's probably just Norfolk'n good. Or Suffolk'n useless. 😉

[TheRock 149]

On 17/11/2022 at 12:58, TheGunnShow said:

He's probably just Norfolk'n good. Or Suffolk'n useless. 😉

There's Norfolk'n chance that he'll be re-selected for the next GE by the sounds of it. 😂

Edited November 21, 2022 by TheRock

[horsefly 4,273]

As a South Norfolk resident, you're more likely to see a mountain rescue team on manoeuvres than see Richard Bacon out in the constituency.

[horsefly 4,273]

Just sent this to Fatty Bacon. Surely even he won't be stupid enough to use expenses for an xmas party.

To: Richard Bacon MP

 

Given your Prime Minister's statement that using expenses (taxpayer's money) to fund Christmas parties will require public justification could you please tell me what your plans are in this respect. It would also be advisable to make a public announcement to ensure all constituents are clear about your intentions.

[Naturalcynic 626]

2 hours ago, horsefly said:

Just sent this to Fatty Bacon. Surely even he won't be stupid enough to use expenses for an xmas party.

To: Richard Bacon MP

 

Given your Prime Minister's statement that using expenses (taxpayer's money) to fund Christmas parties will require public justification could you please tell me what your plans are in this respect. It would also be advisable to make a public announcement to ensure all constituents are clear about your intentions.

Given your admission of having sent him a large number of emails, most of which I assume to have been of a similarly hostile nature to that above, it’s highly likely that he will choose once again to ignore you.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Naturalcynic

[horsefly 4,273]

50 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Given your admission of having sent him a large number of emails, most of which I assume to have been of a similarly hostile nature to that above, it’s highly likely that he will choose once again to ignore you.

Jesus! you must really struggle with social media if you are seriously suggesting those words are hostile. They merely ask him to comply with the very instructions that his own PM and leader has ordered him to follow in being transparent to his constituents.

Of course, I don't expect him to reply because he doesn't reply to anyone, as huge numbers of his exasperated constituents have protested on the BBC and in the local press (including ex-Tory Party councillors).

Finally, it is the duty of all MPs to serve the interests of their constituents irrespective of political allegiance. Constituents who express their anger at an MPs egregious failings have as much right to expect a response as ones who express their praise. There is a world of difference between expressing anger and making threats of violence or abuse.

[Naturalcynic 626]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Jesus! you must really struggle with social media if you are seriously suggesting those words are hostile. They merely ask him to comply with the very instructions that his own PM and leader has ordered him to follow in being transparent to his constituents.

Of course, I don't expect him to reply because he doesn't reply to anyone, as huge numbers of his exasperated constituents have protested on the BBC and in the local press (including ex-Tory Party councillors).

Finally, it is the duty of all MPs to serve the interests of their constituents irrespective of political allegiance. Constituents who express their anger at an MPs egregious failings have as much right to expect a response as ones who express their praise. There is a world of difference between expressing anger and making threats of violence or abuse.

And there’s a world of difference between expressing anger time and time again just for the sake of it in an arguably vexatious manner, and asking a considered and courteous question.  Given that he probably receives far more communications than he can possibly respond to, he’s far more likely to reply to relevant and polite emails than those that are antagonistic and are sent simply to clog up his inbox.