Remind us again...Why didn’t you help a homeless person out and let them live in that spare house you claim to have instead of housing the Ukrainians? Oh yeah, rent!
What did you do to help out?
Remind us again...Why didn’t you help a homeless person out and let them live in that spare house you claim to have instead of housing the Ukrainians? Oh yeah, rent!
Absolutely fûck all apart from donating some cash but then again, I wasn’t virtue signalling about housing refugees from another country while banging the drum but doing fûck all for the homeless of this country. Have you still got your tenants, sorry, Ukrainians? Any plans to give some shelter to some British homeless people when they’ve gone?Remind us again...
What did you do to help out?
A question is not incorrect.
Are you ever going to say what defamation (if any) you think was published?
Who published it?
even if you are right.
More ESG.Think it might be better if commentators read the report before commentating, there's a myriad of rabbit holes you could go down.
The obvious feeling you get on reading it is how Orwellian it is in its deliberation, how much the power of suggestion and nudge nudge wink wink is incorporated in the text.
An example being they couldn't lay a glove on him over Russian allegations.
The use of newspaper articles casting aspertions but none of support.
The tenuous link to Enoch Powell the speaking out about black lives matter (how quickly they e faded from view)
His stance on climate change the list goes on.
It doesn't go unnoticed how much he doesn't fit in with the modern way of thinking that banks have set themselves on a road on by way of ESG.
One youve got to laugh at in the report is how they'd open up a can of worms if they took him on, did they listen lol perhaps the two that lost their job were just views as collateral damage.
Perhaps you would like to set out the defence?
Because it's irrelevant as the dossier on him makes clear.More ESG.
Why do you never comment on the access to a bank account at natwest? It negates all your points.
If one single imputation is not true and damage is done, then you have a claim.
What has ESG got to do with it?have set themselves on a road on by way of ESG.
Yes he disclosed to millions what was produced by a fewBy published do you mean produced evidence?
It's only irrelevant if you want it to be.Because it's irrelevant as the dossier on him makes clear.
Have you read the dossier?
It's out there report back what you find.It's only irrelevant if you want it to be.
Personally I prefer a fuller picture