Author: Andrew Turner's Office
Island Set to Have Two MPs
9:15 am Tuesday, 15th February, 2011, Isle of Wight
ShortURL: http://wig.ht/twomps
Read More- Island-wide, News, Politics
Following the debate on whether the Island should have one or two MPs, this in from Andrew Turner’s office this morning, in their own words. Ed
Andrew Turner is delighted to announce that the Isle of Wight is now set to have two MPs after the next election (due in 2015), following discussions last night with the Government about how the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill would affect the Isle of Wight.
The Bill is designed to cut the number of MPs and standardise the size of constituencies. It allowed for only two named exceptions – both in Scotland – the Western Isles and Orkney & Shetland.
New constituencies will be an average size of around 76,000 voters which would have meant that part of the Island (which currently has 110,000 voters) would have been paired with the mainland, forming a cross-Solent constituency for the first time since the Great Reform Act of 1832.
Wide support for better representation
The Island’s MP led a vigorous campaign against the Government’s proposals which was supported by the local political parties, independently owned local media and many Island organisations including the Chamber of Commerce.
He also organised a parliamentary petition which he presented to the House of Commons and delivered to Downing Street together with Mark Chiverton and Jill Wareham, the Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates who stood against him in the last General Election.
Lords voted against cross-Solent constituency
The House of Lords voted last month in favour of an amendment that would prevent any part of the Island being joined to the mainland to form a cross-Solent constituency.
The amendment was first tabled by Mr Turner in the House of Commons, but due to a lack of time it was not voted on before the Bill moved to the House of Lords.
The same amendment was then tabled in the House of Lords by Lord Fowler, a long-time Seaview resident. The Lords passed it with a large majority of 74 (196 in favour – 122 against). The Isle of Wight amendment was supported on a cross-party basis in the Lords by 123 Labour, 28 Conservative, 25 Crossbench, 14 Liberal Democrat, 5 other peers, and 1 Bishop. It was the largest rebellion since the Coalition Government was formed.
Government agrees to exception
After the Government’s defeat in the Lords, the same amendment was due to be debated and voted on in the Commons over the next few days, however hectic last minute negotiations brought about an acceptance from the Government that the Isle of Wight should be added to the list of exceptions – and should in future have two MPs. This morning the Government have tabled amendments to the Bill that are expected to be voted on today in the Commons.
Mr Turner said, “This is a stunning victory for the Island. When we first launched the ‘One Wight’ Campaign everybody discussed whether we should fight for two Island MPs – but we came to a collective decision that we should put forward the message that the Island’s unique circumstances should be recognised – and if that meant continuing with a single MP it was preferable to any part of the Island being hived off and joined with the mainland. We thought that approach would be more likely to succeed than if we were seen to be campaigning for advantageous treatment.
“I was initially disappointed that the House of Commons did not get to vote on my amendment, particularly as I already knew I had pledges of support from many MPs of all parties. However Lord Fowler did an amazing job in the House of Lords where the timetable rules are different – he was always confident that the Lords would never support such a daft proposal – but I must admit I was very pleased by how big the majority against it was. The Island was the only area to win special treatment – despite spirited campaigns by other areas to be added to the list of exceptions.”
Island will be over-represented
Mr Turner went on to say, “The Government have listened to our arguments and now seeing the strength of feeling on this issue both on the Island, in the House of Commons and the House of Lords they have accepted them. The Government understand that we wish to be separate and even if that meant the Island being under-represented it would be preferable to having one and a half MPs. They have sensibly decided now that the Island should have two MPs – and will therefore in future be over-represented when compared to the rest of the country.
“I don’t think we would have got this outstanding result if we had simply campaigned for two MPs as some people suggested. It was the fact that the Island was prepared to be under-represented that added to the strength of our argument. I would like to thank everyone who helped to bring this about, including Richard Priest of the Riverside Centre who was a very effective non-political spokesman for the campaign. It certainly shows the wisdom of setting party politics aside and working with people of all political persuasions and of none, in order to achieve the right result.”
This is a win-win result for the Island but for Andrew to claim it as a victory for the OneWight campaign is stretching credulity to its limits.
Throughout, that campaign was for one MP – probably because no-one ever thought we would get two without sharing one with the mainland.
Anyone willing to bet against Andrew standing down at the next election – unable to face the comparisons and competition another MP will bring?
Offensive comment?
Who will the Conservative Association adopt as their candidate for the new Consituency? My bet is that the short list will be very short indeed and then Islanders can realy use their votes to this Council and Government what they think opf the cuts. DP perhaps?
Offensive comment?
Correct for Turner to claim this a victory is ridiculous…they campaigned for one MP for the Island.
Lords voted an amendement yesterday ti increase the varience on the 76,000 by 5% to 7.5% which brings us even closer to qualifying for 2 MPs as a right
Offensive comment?
BTW..that was a Labour peers amendment.
Turner achieved nothing except wasting time and money better spent on campaigning for democracy instead of against it
Offensive comment?
OneWight lost and andrew should apologise. He’s done a double ‘U’ turn. He and his pals never wanted two MPs for the IoW. Victory for TwoWight.
Offensive comment?
Absolutely. When I was accosted and refused to sign the OneWight petition because I preferred to campaign for 2 MPs, I was told ‘well you can’t – that isn’t going to happen’ and looked at in disgust.
This is a victory for those of us who for a year have said that two MPs is the only way!
Offensive comment?
I totally agree. I believe the Island needed two MPs whether thet were both on the Island or one from the mainland I wasnt fussed. The clue was in the name of the campign and when I spoke to someone asking for my signature, they said we were looking for one MP to represent the Island not two.
Offensive comment?
Yay!
Offensive comment?
Double helpings of what we’ve already got would make anyone sick! Imagine a familiar blue creature arising from its winter hibernation to hear the sound of a chainsaw slicing through wood. The true blue creature emerges to find its woodland habitat completely destroyed by the butchers weilding their chainsaws. Strange how familiar those butchers are, ah yes its their very own boys in blue, Andrew Turner and David Pugh, the very same people they voted into power. Wonder what they’ll be voting next time – ‘eco island’ anyone?
Offensive comment?
A victory for the Isle of Wight electorate but Andrew Turner’s claims are both hypocritical and ridiculous. He campaigned for “one Island – one MP”. When I spoke to him he was totally uninterested in two MP’s.
It has been left to a few individuals to speak up for fair representation on the Island.
Offensive comment?
Turner thinks we are fools, whereas we know he is one.
This is making him look even more of a laughing stock than usual, and that takes some doing!
Offensive comment?
Oh I do hope they put Pugh up as a candidate for the other island seat, what an opportunity that would be for us to cut the arrogant brat down to size for once and for all.
Offensive comment?
Pugh would get elected – I have said it many times: This is Tory island.
Postal votes and the votes from all the nursing home residents see to that. It need sorting.
The old are very vunerable.
Offensive comment?
Very good point actually-especially if he were standing in East Wight. I very much doubt that he could be council leader and parliamentary candidate at the same time-also his tantrums and behaviour would count very much against him!!
Personally, I don’t think he’d have the guts to stand on the IOW as MP.
Offensive comment?
Ithink the lib dems might have blown there chances We now have to find a person who lives on Island.And will represent it, and not just tow the party line.
Offensive comment?
What we need is an Island resident who stands as an independent candidate. Better still would be two of them.
Offensive comment?
Oh dear, Mr Pugh will be loving this and I daresay he might even manage to get voted in too!
Offensive comment?
Well done Andrew – you made parliament see sense. Like others, I do hope that dreadful Master Pugh will not dare to stand as a candidate but I suspect he finds this all very exciting. We shall see.
Offensive comment?
Really great news. 2 PM’s is the best possible outcome with 1.5 coming second. Both being better than just 1.
This is a great leap forward for the island whose votes will then (in 2015) be fairly represented.
Offensive comment?
I doubt Pugh has much chance as a prospective MP here and will run off to another constituency as soon as he can. The real worry is that the person who apparently craves the role of MP is apparently the Cabinet member for Transport, Edward Giles.
Offensive comment?
God help us if this comes true
Offensive comment?
only if we elect him
Offensive comment?
it will be down to the electorate who represents us
Offensive comment?
A colleague has just drawn my attention to Stig’s comment at 12.30. Like so much of what appears on this blog it bears no relation to the truth. I have absolutely no wish to be MP for either of the IW constituencies (or indeed anywhere else).
Offensive comment?
glad you cleared that up. we have no wish for you to be our MP either.
As for what appears on this blog, the stories are always accurate. The comments are often opinion. Please, if you see a comment that you feel is wrong, post your own view. People on here want reasoned sensible debate, the more councillors on here putting forth their own views, the more balanced and reasoned that debate will be. Obviously theres always some that are idiots, but speaking for myself, I want tory councillors to come on here and convince people that what the council is doing is the right thing for the island. Maybe you can change our minds, and maybe we will change yours. This blog is a genuine opportunity for councillors to engage with the public. Lets just hope you are politer than Roger Mazillius was the other week.
Offensive comment?
If you are County Councillor Edward Giles with responsibility for our libraries then you should have been at Quay Arts this evening where a presentation was made as to how our branch libraries could be saved by reducing central costs.
Your name was mentioned but you were somewhere else reading VB (who organised the meeting)so you don’t know how it might be done here as it has been done elsewhere.
As for you being an MP: The Party’s Over mate.
Offensive comment?
Edward does not have responsibility for libraries, he has responsibility for loo’s. I had a meeting with him the other week and I do not give praise easily but I was impressed with him. He listened, he asked the right questions and since the meeting has been helpful.
Offensive comment?
Not quite what I heard. Edward Giles did not appear to be aware of his own programme. Not very good!
Offensive comment?
The new MP will have to be elected, lets just hope the Island electorate doesn’t vote in a Tory or Liberal. They are making a shambles of running the country, and the Island so far!
Offensive comment?
Forget party politics – Vote for a person who would have the interests of the islanders at
heart – Far to much emphasis is placed on following the party line.
TwoWight at long last!
Offensive comment?
Briliant, as long as it’s not another bloody tory
Offensive comment?
I think that Geoff Lumley should put himself forward as a candidate in the next General Election, he seems a caring Councillor who has a passion for the island and it’s residents.
It would be good to get a “yin and yang” political balance on the island instead of “one party” politics.
My vote goes to Geoff, what say you?
Offensive comment?
Yes Geoff Lumley is just what this Island needs, but I dont think there is much chance of getting what I wish for !
Offensive comment?
I would back Geoff Lumley as well
Offensive comment?
me too..but then again he did say he had no ambition to be an MP when I once told him he should stand..how about a change of heart Geoff?
Offensive comment?
I agree and Mark Chiverton would also be an ideal candidate.
Pity they are both members of the Labour party and that has never been the flavour of the day on the IoW.
Offensive comment?
I don’t suppose we will go back to the old division of West Medine and East Medine because the consituencies will be based on population.
But it would be interesting if Andrew Turner had HMP Isle of Wight in his constituency as he just voted against prisoners having a vote.
Offensive comment?
Great work Andrew. The campaign worked!
Offensive comment?
no it didn’t we are getting two MP’s
Offensive comment?
May referendum here we come….I hope the Island turns out to vote yes to A.V so in future every vote counts…..maybe that way we will see two people we actually want representing us in power.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2010/may/10/proportional-representation-alternative-vote-plus
Offensive comment?
AV is a waste of time and money…why go to all the trouble to replace FPTP with a system that is just as flawed …it no good LibDems trying to pretend that ‘every vote will count’ it won’t…its not PR and is as far from it as FPTP
Offensive comment?
Of course ‘every vote counts’ in an AV election – because if the voter puts down all the preferences they are entitled then their vote has to be backing one or either of the two leading candidates at the final count. If you don’t understand that [see elections in Australia since 190something] I suggest you vote ‘don’t know’ on the ballot in May
Offensive comment?
No.5, This is one package, if people want 2 MPs they will need to vote yes to AV. The commons use a form of AV, Labour and other parties use a form of AV. Labour argue that AV is too complicated for the vox populi, which quite frankly I find insulting. Tactical voting is all most people have the option to do under fptp……now that’s complicated.
A system where less than half of the electorate get the representative they want, while the vast majority who collectively vote for smaller parties are left wondering what happened is ludicrous.
No, AV isn’t perfect, but it’s an improvement on the current system.
Offensive comment?
no its not…once Lords have passed this motion (amendment 20), which they did on it first reading with a majority of 74 it will become law. Each amendment is dealt with seperately, so the Lords will debate the varience of 7.5% instead of 5% ( amendemnet17?) because the Commons rejected it)
To give the Island special dispensation and 2 MP is part of the Boundaries Reform which ius part of the same bill for Electoral reform…but not tied to it. Boundary re-orgisation will take place whether ther is an AV referendum or not.
Offensive comment?
AV is equally as flawed and is not suitable for party politics..it works for the Labour party where there is a shared politic and you vote for a person, but under AV If you live in a place where only 3 parties stand the vote is completely different if you have 12 parties standing.
And as in my case a large amount of people won’t do the multiple choice..they vote for one party and don’t rank the others at all, so the system is not geared to them.
Multiple choice exams where bought in to help dum down exams…AV does the same for elections
AV is as flawed as FTPT and the cost of change is just not worth it…they should have persued PR from the start.
Offensive comment?
I completely agree they should have pursued PR from the outset, but AV will retain the strengths of the current system, such as single-member constituencies and strengthen that relationship, but make sure that our true preferences are reflected in our elections. I still see PR as the favourable alternative but in its absence a vote for change will demonstrate our discontent with the current system and our desire for greater reform.
I am relieved to hear the AV referendum will be more straight forward than I had understood. What is worrying is that I follow politics, and i’m confused, what hope do people that don’t follow it have?!
Offensive comment?
I guess that in the end the government decided that the Island being under represented had nothing to do with the size of the electorate and everything to do with Turner being the MP. So at least half of us will get a reprieve.
Fingers crossed that I live in the non Turner half, although I would consider moving to the other side of the island if need be
Offensive comment?
Lets just pray that its not Carole, Gulp
Offensive comment?
I would not be surprised – She does a great deal of his work for him now.
I am sure that Andrew will be elevated to the House of Lords befor the next General Election.
Will they marry, then she will become Lady Turner of Pent-House Medina?
Offensive comment?
“When we first launched the ‘One Wight’ Campaign everybody discussed whether we should fight for two Island MPs – but we came to a collective decision that we should put forward the message that the Island’s unique circumstances should be recognised – and if that meant continuing with a single MP it was preferable to any part of the Island being hived off and joined with the mainland. We thought that approach would be more likely to succeed than if we were seen to be campaigning for advantageous treatment.”
So once again, AT decides, along with others, that he thinks doing a half arsed job would be best for the island. Rather than pushing for over-representation, or even simply fair representation, he decides that its not worth trying and the best thing to do is save his own job.
Just like he did with the ferries then. When campaigning for election, he tries to get the office of fair trading to investigate the ferry companies. When elected, and told that an investigation will not happen, he decides its not worth persuing further.
one further quote:
It certainly shows the wisdom of setting party politics aside and working with people of all political persuasions and of none, in order to achieve the right result.”
Is it me, or is that a dig at Pugh and the way he is handling the cuts and running the council?
Generally, it seems to me that the island has the result that it wanted, but not through Turners actions or the OneWight campaign. Its laughable that turner is trying to claim credit for something he actively campaigned against.
Offensive comment?
whoa whoa whoa ,just remember who caused all this ,it was the Labour party who screwed up the country in the first place
Offensive comment?
How???….only if you beleive the Tory propaganda, it was the Tory Bankers who stitched up the country…and anyway we are talking about local issues and local politicians and the local Labour politician (yes just one) has a fantastic reputation and puts all the Tories ( and most of the LibDems) to shame
Offensive comment?
what the hell has Labour got to do with us getting 2 MPs? We havnt had a labour MP for ages mores the pity.
As for screwing up the country, how exactly? Labour had years under Blair where our economy was incredibly stable. Brown did change that somewhat, but it was down to the bankers.
Banks should have been left to go bust and government should have simply garanteed savings, but that would have cost more than propping up banks.
All in all, it comes down to the fact that bankers were gambling. There was even a financial product introduced which would make a loss for investors because the bank was hedging by betting on the value of that product falling.
Tighter bank regulation should be enforced, and the people to do that are not bankers.
Offensive comment?
yes they are….
Opps – you said ‘bankers’
Offensive comment?
It is all very confusing to me. Given the diverse centres of our ‘South Island’ population, in order to create two constituencies of circa 55K voters, where do you draw the boundaries – underwater?
If the Medina is decreed a boundary, will I need a passport or identity card to visit East Cowes? The floating bridge might need repainting after every election, though it might be best to repair or replace it first.
Offensive comment?
what the hell are you on about? a passport to pass between constituencies? Portsmouth is a separate constituency, the boundary between us and them could be said to be mid solent, and there are no passports needed to pass between the two.
May i suggest a google session to educate yourself on what constituencies are. You seem to be confusing them with countries.
Offensive comment?
Sorry, really stupid of me, you see I thought that we were now to have two MP’s representing the Island. So instead of there being one based on the mainland as originally proposed, we will have two, both based here.
Be patient with me because I am very slow.
That being the case, I thought that the boundaries would need to be drawn to try to divide the electorate evenly, which in turn might require West & East Cowes being in separate constituencies.
The passport comment was a childish pathetic attempt at whimsy – suggest you google that. By the way, the Medina is a river that divides the Island from Newport to just short of the Bramble Bank – which is not currently FSA regulated.
Offensive comment?
well its good to see your sarcasm is alive and well if nothing else. So what if east and west cowes are in separate constituencies? I would say thats the best of both worlds.
I would suggest you google whimsy yourself. Your quite right when you say it was a poor attempt.
Offensive comment?
The more I think about it the more ridiculous, not to mention pathetic, it is for Turner to claim this as a victory.
One Wight? Although this is a victory for those opposing the Turner/County Press stitch up, in reality the island could not be more divided than by having 2 MPs.
As for the talk of MPs from 2 different parties working together for the good of the Island, come again? Doesn’t that depend on who is defining what is best for the island?
Offensive comment?
Only Ventnor blog could produce this sort of banter, if only politicians could be so open, so funny and so honest. Ah well we’ll just have to see what the next election brings.
Offensive comment?
BBC Parliament Channel Now
Offensive comment?
What’s wrong with you all?
Surely you should actually be pleased to have got 2 MPs rather than whinging about who it will be or how it happened?
Enjoy the positive news and stop turning everything into something to complain about.
Offensive comment?
Lauryn well said.Two M.P’s good result for the Island.
Offensive comment?
Well said Lauryn!! People aren’t happy unless they are moaning!
Offensive comment?
Result in…Ayes 311 Noes 244…we will have 2 MPS
Amendemnet 20 passed
Offensive comment?
Thanks No.5
Offensive comment?
Wonderful news
Offensive comment?
Can I point out that we don’t yet have 2 MPs!!!! We have the opportunity (the next 2 days dependant) to vote on a joint package for boundary change AND A.V. on the 5th of May.
Other area’s of the country are passionate about their boundaries staying as they are, but haven’t got the dispensation we have, therefore the chances of them voting YES in the referendum are slim. We will have to make sure every islander goes out to vote if this is what people want.
I believe AV is fairer system, and by getting to rank our preferences in a system where the winning candidate must have over 50% of the vote we should end up with 2 MPs we actually want.
VOTE YES ON MAY 5TH!!!
Offensive comment?
Great – we’ll have two half-wits for two half-Wights! ;-)
Offensive comment?
Seems it was that Lord Fowler of Seaview wot done it,in the upper ‘ouse, proving once again that it’s not what you know, but who !Nudge nudge, wink wink, know wot i mean ?
Offensive comment?
Not really..he called for one MP
I’d like to think that justice is responsible…there is no way in a modern democratic society that you can leave one element under represented in the way the island was…once the cross solent constituency was ruled out (thanks to Fowler) there really was no constitutional way in which we could not get two MPs.
I think AT realised this and jumped on the bandwagon straight away.
We will have two constuencies of about 55,000 each. 55,000 is far nearer to the 72,200 minimum quota required for each constiuency than 110,000 is to the 144,400 required to stay as one constiuency
Offensive comment?
Shows what a flimflam this “modern democratic society” really is when those elected representatives turned down our equal democratic representation and the one MP that is supposed to be working for the good of the island was more interested in serving himself, although miraculously now claims this is what he wanted all along. Hardly any wonder trust is a thing of the past.
From OneWights template letter to The Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP Deputy Prime Minister
“We are not asking for more favourable treatment than other areas, simply the right to decide for ourselves the best form of parliamentary representation that suits our unique circumstances. As you are reducing the number of MPs, I believe that a single MP is the best way forward for the Island.”
Offensive comment?
montana sliver,
What utter rubbish – You still do not get it.
Two is better than one; one is better than none.
Andrew Turner MP should apologise for waisting his time and our money on his pointless pipe dream. The same goes for all his capitalistic friends, especially those in the local media.
Offensive comment?
One is better than none?
What on earth are you talking about nobody was proposing we should not have an MP, I think you have lost the plot Don
Offensive comment?
One £5.00 note is better than no £5.00 note – Think about it.
Offensive comment?
I fear I’m going to rain on a few people’s parade. I am NOT pleased by this.
Why would I be? Another £200k for someone with a skewed moral compass. Whether a brutalised boy from Bullingdon, or one of the more familiar local dreck; the sort who was so despised and distrusted at school that they now have too much to prove. With delusions of granduer, a heighten sense of self-importance & either too stupid to realise they are someone else’s patsy or just they are using government as a stepping stone to the lucrative lobbying/think tank gig.
Regrettably all politicians have failed the morale hazard and I have no truck with any of them. The ideals of Parliamentary democracy only exist in the memories of some grandparents & some academic books, both are becoming rarer. Where were the politicians when some of us were warning of peak oil, and energy security. Flogging the supply chain to those that could already afford it. Now the Asian markets will drive up prices still further. Just how relevant is parliament anyway?
Looking around the world, lesson are there to be learnt. We don’t have to do something just because it was done that way before. That’s is the behaviour of robots, not humans. Moreover, everywhere people are displacing the old order, no longer prepared to put up with it.
So what is the alternative? As politics are about local issues, so let us start there. Lose the council, elect a mayor/governor for a fix term for the county. The office has a budget, taxes can be raised, spent etc, and special places like the Island might then actually start to compete. Nationally we elect a premier who can appoint their own cabinet, again for a fixed term. Every aspect of the candidate’s lives is therefore examined & let’s be honest, who does not vote of personality. Our premier would really have the X factor. The legislature, second chamber again is voted for a fixed term. Neither the premier nor legislature can raise or spend money without the other offices consent. Like the US congress.
Finally and most importantly the local town & parish councils retain their apolitical, unpaid status. But they are also given real delegated powers over planning etc.
Save a fortune, transparent and open to anybody. Oh yes with a cap of election spending.
Offensive comment?
but thats never going to happen and now we have two MP’s so are equally representated with the rest opf the country (well, over represented for a few years)
Offensive comment?
I understand Hosni Mubarak is available…
Offensive comment?
cut and paste from todays Daily Mail
This, quite simply, is not the way town halls should be run. Elected local representatives should not have a lucrative financial interest in holding public office, or in sitting on public bodies. They should serve local people, not exploit them.
The truth is that the existence of large allowances ultimately gives councillors a personal stake in retaining power — which means that decision-making can be influenced as much by personal factors as by public needs.
That is undoubtedly why, amid all the public worries about cuts to services, there has not been a single councillor saying their own personal allowances should be abolished rather than see libraries or playgroups closed.
Lavish: A study revealed this week that half of all council chiefs – once known simply as town clerks – earn more than the Prime Minister
Lavish: A study revealed this week that half of all council chiefs – once known simply as town clerks – earn more than the Prime Minister
Shamefully, they have become too reliant on the gravy train.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1357434/Town-hall-bosses-earn-David-Cameron-huge-expenses.html#ixzz1E75KYt9L
Offensive comment?
Will this mean that the two Mps who will only represent 55,000 constituents each, be paid less than Mps who have an average of 76000 ? Was that a pig I just saw flying past my window?
Offensive comment?
In our Big Society Ray I think our MPs should volunteer to for free, especially as we are all in it together (up to our necks)
There goes another one, these flying pigs are becoming a real pest
Offensive comment?
Hang on, I thought we started with a constituency of 136,000…..that’s 68,000 per MP isn’t it?
Offensive comment?
I understand the most recent voting population is approx. 110,000
Offensive comment?
The official figure is 110,000 but that doesn’t account for ‘unaccounted people of voting age’ i.e those who choose not to be on the lectroral roll for whatever reason.
The census running from March has specific instruction to update this figure which could easily lead to 136,000
Offensive comment?
Thank you for clarifying that, I thought i’d got that figure from somewhere and wasn’t going completely mad! (although you may disagree lol).
Offensive comment?
Absolutely brilliant! Now can we concentrate on saving the libraries
Offensive comment?