Monday 2nd February 2015

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 1:50 pm

Q: Why did you come to this school?

Cameron says he wanted to find a school that showed that, if you set high expectations, pupils will perform well.

He is at Kingsmead school in Enfield.

He says inner city schools can perform better than schools with more prosperous intakes.

Only one slight problem with that...Enfield is in Outer London.

Desperately trying to shore up Nick de Bois' vote seems to be the answer as to why he was there.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 1:52 pm

Wow - we've got serious snow falling and settling. Winter wonderland outside. Our second dog has never experienced snow ... going to be interesting to see her reaction when we try to go for a walk in a bit.

Campaign meeting tonight might be in question now though.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:01 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Wow - we've got serious snow falling and settling. Winter wonderland outside. Our second dog has never experienced snow ... going to be interesting to see her reaction when we try to go for a walk in a bit.

Campaign meeting tonight might be in question now though.

The cold and snow has just brought two woodpeckers to our bird feeders.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:09 pm

Ian Dunt ‏@IanDunt 5m5 minutes ago
Offender work programme grinds to a halt when privatised probation firms realise they don't have minibus licences http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/02 ... oing-today" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:20 pm

Anyone any ideas what this is about?

Nia Griffith @NiaGriffithMP · 4m 4 minutes ago
Pls will Plaid detail any genuine constituent concerns to my office & steer clear of libellous allegations @SeanLlanelli @Vaughan_Wms

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:26 pm

So what do people think about Nick Clegg on Ask the Leaders? There's quite a contrast with Ed who was relaxed, sometimes thoughtful with difficult questions and ultimately honest (about EMA he had to say he couldn't make promises he couldn't keep). Clegg seems quite aggressive in comparison, a bit lecturing. But of course I'm hugely biased! Hopefully they'll be some tweets to give me a clue how he came across to others.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:28 pm

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 5m5 minutes ago
Clegg sounding a little bit wound up right now #AskTheLeaders

David Maddox ‏@DavidPBMaddox 5m5 minutes ago
"Forget me, forget the LibDems" may not be best line from Clegg to student voters...unlikely they'll forget tuition fees...or forgive

Editing to add:

Hadn't seen Willow's post before I put these up. I think they go some way to answering her question though.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:30 pm

And to answer my own question, it seems twitter are finding Clegg boring, wound up, whiney, patronising.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:41 pm

Can anyone help me out here?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30976509#

Can Labour pay for university fee cut?

and

Is @edballsmp planning to use "accounting wheeze" to "pay for" £3k tuition fee cut costing approx £2bn?

That's nicky, in case you couldn't guess.

Surely the current system is an accounting wheeze?
If public expenditure is public expenditure is etc, then lending money to a student to go to uni is no different from funding the unis directly. Especially when half of the debt will be irrecoverable.

Isn't cutting fees a more honest way to do it?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 2:53 pm

Willow904 wrote:So what do people think about Nick Clegg on Ask the Leaders? There's quite a contrast with Ed who was relaxed, sometimes thoughtful with difficult questions and ultimately honest (about EMA he had to say he couldn't make promises he couldn't keep). Clegg seems quite aggressive in comparison, a bit lecturing. But of course I'm hugely biased! Hopefully they'll be some tweets to give me a clue how he came across to others.

I genuinely thought Clegg would do quite well, as irrelevant as he is, but he really cam across badly; as you say, aggressive, hectoring even and that seems to be the consensus on Twitter. If Cameron watched that, and saw Miliband's one earlier, he must be really regretting agreeing to this as I'll be surprised if he doesn't crash & burn.

As an aside, I usually turn over for the sofa bits, but as it was Dawn "Thumper" Foster I stayed with it. Boy, what a lesson in body language, I fear for the LD guys life, you could visibly see Dawn getting angrier; the Guardian were idiots not to keep her, she knows her stuff and is passionate about it which is what they sorely need (and probably why she had to go).

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:21 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Willow904 wrote:So what do people think about Nick Clegg on Ask the Leaders? There's quite a contrast with Ed who was relaxed, sometimes thoughtful with difficult questions and ultimately honest (about EMA he had to say he couldn't make promises he couldn't keep). Clegg seems quite aggressive in comparison, a bit lecturing. But of course I'm hugely biased! Hopefully they'll be some tweets to give me a clue how he came across to others.
I genuinely thought Clegg would do quite well, as irrelevant as he is, but he really cam across badly; as you say, aggressive, hectoring even and that seems to be the consensus on Twitter. If Cameron watched that, and saw Miliband's one earlier, he must be really regretting agreeing to this as I'll be surprised if he doesn't crash & burn.

As an aside, I usually turn over for the sofa bits, but as it was Dawn "Thumper" Foster I stayed with it. Boy, what a lesson in body language, I fear for the LD guys life, you could visibly see Dawn getting angrier; the Guardian were idiots not to keep her, she knows her stuff and is passionate about it which is what they sorely need (and probably why she had to go).

I actually wonder if Cameron will come across better. Having no conscience makes lying and deceiving so much easier. Clegg came across quite well when talking about the need for more social care and making mental health equal with physical health as he obviously believes in it, but when it came to defending the Health and Social Care Act he was awful and I suspect it's because he knows what he was saying in its defense was simply untrue.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:32 pm

Willow904 wrote:I actually wonder if Cameron will come across better.

He didn't. I had to switch off before the end, the patronising way he was talking to (as was pointed out above) a very switched & savvy group of people was infuriating me so much; and, judging by the body language around him, infuriating them as well.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:37 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Willow904 wrote:I actually wonder if Cameron will come across better.
He didn't. I had to switch off before the end, the patronising way he was talking to (as was pointed out above) a very switched & savvy group of people was infuriating me so much; and, judging by the body language around him, infuriating them as well.

I only caught a bit at the end. I'm trying to get some feedback on twitter, but the audience themselves all looked a bit sullen and stony as if he'd said something to upset them. What did I miss?

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:39 pm

Willow904 wrote: I actually wonder if Cameron will come across better. Having no conscience makes lying and deceiving so much easier.

His 'sincerity' over the badger cull was horrible.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:40 pm

JP Janson De Couet ‏@ostercywriter 30m30 minutes ago
Round of applause as student asks Cameron if his attitude to Saudi Arabia has anything to do with oil. Cameron goes purple.
#AskTheLeaders

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:41 pm

Isabel Oakeshott ‏@IsabelOakeshott 27m27 minutes ago
The PM looks very uncomfortable on #AskTheLeaders A reminder of why he is so reluctant to do those election TV debates

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:42 pm

Willow904 wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Willow904 wrote:I actually wonder if Cameron will come across better.
He didn't. I had to switch off before the end, the patronising way he was talking to (as was pointed out above) a very switched & savvy group of people was infuriating me so much; and, judging by the body language around him, infuriating them as well.
I only caught a bit at the end. I'm trying to get some feedback on twitter, but the audience themselves all looked a bit sullen and stony as if he'd said something to upset them. What did I miss?

this

Q: Why did we fly flags at half mast after the death of the Saudi king, given their human rights record?

Cameron says there is a long-standing agreement. It was a sign of respect.

Q: But it is not a sign of respect to the victims of that regime?

Cameron says he understands people’s concerns. But there is an important point; the Saudis have helped the British fight terrorism. One piece of information they provided saved hundreds of lives.

From AS blog. He's omitted the questioner's mention of sentencing someone to 1000 lashes.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:44 pm

Barry Hodges ‏@Ennor1 2m2 minutes ago
Camorons initial thoughts on #AskTheLeaders "oh god, I knew they would be young but nobody told me there would be young plebs!"

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:47 pm

Willow904 wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Willow904 wrote:I actually wonder if Cameron will come across better.
He didn't. I had to switch off before the end, the patronising way he was talking to (as was pointed out above) a very switched & savvy group of people was infuriating me so much; and, judging by the body language around him, infuriating them as well.
I only caught a bit at the end. I'm trying to get some feedback on twitter, but the audience themselves all looked a bit sullen and stony as if he'd said something to upset them. What did I miss?

A typical Dave performance. He was asked why, if we are making cuts, they could waste money on things like the badger culls; aside from him thinking badger culls is their most unpopular policy, his answer was (more or less) to say TB is bad for the badgers and then pull his patented sad face. His stock answer to the question about cutting housing benefit for 18-21 year olds (it is all about the scroungers apparently) didn't go down too well, he was totally owned on the questions of sucking up to the Saudis and just hectoring on the subject of Islamophobia - I half expected him to start talking about Muslamic rayguns at that point. Very, very poor. One tweet sums it up

ClaudineLewis ‏@QuietNotStupid · 12m12 minutes ago
My daughter's nail polish is exactly the same shade as David Cameron's face - tangerine dream... #AskTheLeaders

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:48 pm

I think it was what he didn't say that pissed off the audience.
Nothing that would suggest he understood their concerns about jobs, women's pay, diversity in parliament. #emptydave

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:55 pm

Thanks for all the replies filling me in on Cameron's performance. It sounds like it was a bit more of a car crash than the bit I saw at the end.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 3:56 pm

gilsey wrote:I think it was what he didn't say that pissed off the audience.
Nothing that would suggest he understood their concerns about jobs, women's pay, diversity in parliament. #emptydave

Yep.

ScoopeX @scoopex
· 5m 5 minutes ago
@David_Cameron #AskTheLeaders
No youth vote at 16
No housing benefit
No lower tuition fees
No minimum wage
Still want to vote Tory?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:00 pm

Ken Livingstone ‏@ken4london · 2m2 minutes ago
This is very good news >> RT @LabourList: Almost 200,000 - Labour membership rises to highest point since 2005 http://labli.st/1Dx1rrR" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:03 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Ken Livingstone ‏@ken4london · 2m2 minutes ago
This is very good news >> RT @LabourList: Almost 200,000 - Labour membership rises to highest point since 2005 http://labli.st/1Dx1rrR" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Outstanding!

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:07 pm

' One message that has begun to percolate through to people was Labour’s focus on the NHS, though apart from a promise to protect rather than “privatise” the service few had noted the details of “how many more nurses we’re going to get, and all that malarkey”. The specifics of Labour’s pledge– including 5,000 new home care workers, 8,000 new GPs, and 20,000 new nurses – seemed to our groups to amountalmost to a caricature of a suspect political promise. It sound completely unrealistic (“where is he going to get 8,000 GPs?”) and unaffordable (“how expensive is that? The biggest problem we’ve got is balancing the books”; “is it the Mansion Tax? It’s going to save the world, that”). And while the new staff would be welcome if they ever materialised, the policy did not sound like an attempt to deal with the deeper problems facing the NHS. The risk to Labour is that an approach designed to highlight one of the party’s strengths will have the effect of reinforcing perhaps its biggest weakness. As one floating voter put it: “Labour are theoretically better on the NHS because they spend, but the money they spend is borrowed”. '
http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... -cent.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Gotta love the attempt to spin.

Edit. Missed out both parties on 31%

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:08 pm

StephenDolan wrote:' One message that has begun to percolate through to people was Labour’s focus on the NHS, though apart from a promise to protect rather than “privatise” the service few had noted the details of “how many more nurses we’re going to get, and all that malarkey”. The specifics of Labour’s pledge– including 5,000 new home care workers, 8,000 new GPs, and 20,000 new nurses – seemed to our groups to amountalmost to a caricature of a suspect political promise. It sound completely unrealistic (“where is he going to get 8,000 GPs?”) and unaffordable (“how expensive is that? The biggest problem we’ve got is balancing the books”; “is it the Mansion Tax? It’s going to save the world, that”). And while the new staff would be welcome if they ever materialised, the policy did not sound like an attempt to deal with the deeper problems facing the NHS. The risk to Labour is that an approach designed to highlight one of the party’s strengths will have the effect of reinforcing perhaps its biggest weakness. As one floating voter put it: “Labour are theoretically better on the NHS because they spend, but the money they spend is borrowed”. '
http://www.conservativehome.com/platfor ... -cent.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Gotta love the attempt to spin.

They have to spin, the reality is to awful.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:21 pm

Lab and the Tories still neck and neck in Lord Ashcroft's latest national poll: Con 31%, Lab 31%, Lib Dem 8%, UKIP 15%, Green 9%

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:23 pm

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 57m57 minutes ago Camberwell, London
Can we drop this "the young people are doing a better job at questioning the politicians than the TV pros" line. They're not.

Diddums.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:26 pm

Janan Ganesh ‏@JananGanesh 1h1 hour ago
David Cameron slightly thrown by a tampon question. #AskTheLeaders

Did all the leaders get a 'tampon question' - or just Dave?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:40 pm

R.I.P. Lucy Glennon.

A little light's gone out with her passing.

There is a lovely tribute to her here - benefitscroungingscum.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/lucy-frances-glennon

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:47 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 57m57 minutes ago Camberwell, London
Can we drop this "the young people are doing a better job at questioning the politicians than the TV pros" line. They're not.
Diddums.

Shame the little weasel has blocked me, that deserves an answer!!

Willow, if you really want to know how OGRFPG did, this picture is worth the proverbial 1000 words!!

That girl was brilliant, asked some good questions all the way through, and some good follow ups. When Ed responded to her he started by asking her what she was doing at Uni, gave her an answers built around what she was studying (sorry, can't remember her course now), answers she confirmed were more than satisfactory.

With Cameron it was different. Somebody had asked him about the failure of the war on drugs, and maybe now was the time to do what Russell Brand suggests and treat it as a health, not a criminal, issue, to which Dave supplied some waffle; she got a follow up, told him that she was doing her final dissertation on that very subject and quoted his own position in Opposition & how it differed from his current stance. Well, I think you can see that she was less than impressed with the patronising garbage he supplied as an answer.

In response to Hodges Tweet, she alone proves him wrong, and she was not unique. Despite everything thrown at us, while people of their calibre can be produced this country isn't finished yet.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:54 pm

Think the Greens are right to drop the Citizens Income. Now they need to go for a policy that Labour should be doing on Social Security.

Will be good to help focus Labour instead of them just being able to brush the Green policy off.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 4:59 pm

That Lib Dem peer replied. He didn't answer any questions. Said he'd only debate with me when I admitted Labour had supported private provision for "decades".

Pathetic. I had never said they hadn't supported it.

In the House of Lords, paid for by you.

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:08 pm

hello to all - including our 51 guests. To the latter I say feel free to sign up and start posting.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:10 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Think the Greens are right to drop the Citizens Income. Now they need to go for a policy that Labour should be doing on Social Security.

Will be good to help focus Labour instead of them just being able to brush the Green policy off.

They haven't dropped it - just come round to saying it's not feasible in the short / medium term. Which is sensible and what Bennett should have said forcefully to A Neil.

The trouble for them is probably that (like UKIP) there will probably be quite a few of their policies that appear to be dropped ... it's inevitable when you've basically got a very long wish list built up over many years ... but it's not a manifesto.

They appear to be gunning for Labour re the changes in social security entitlements for under 25s - seen several statements that they are removing benefits from this group - which I believe isn't quite the case. It's more that Labour want to rejig the system to work alongside their job and training guarantee for young people. Going to be interesting to see how all this pans out - the Greens keeping Labour honest tack, I mean.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:12 pm

Not feasible in the short term?

What exactly happens to change that?

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:16 pm

The transcripts of the Q&A sessions today are here:

https://corporate.sky.com/media-centre/media-packs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cameron's isn't up there yet.

You know how good Ed was when even DFH said so !

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:16 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Not feasible in the short term?

What exactly happens to change that?

One would presume when genuine prosperity returns, then it would be affordable. I believe, though (willing to be corrected) that the Green's policy on economics is for a zero growth economy? If that's the case, then not feasible in the short term becomes not feasible full stop.

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:17 pm

pk1 wrote:The transcripts of the Q&A sessions today are here:

https://corporate.sky.com/media-centre/media-packs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cameron's isn't up there yet.

You know how good Ed was when even DFH said so !

David would have been much better, of course.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:18 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Not feasible in the short term?

What exactly happens to change that?

That was exactly my point earlier up thread Tubby. I'd like to see them setting out what changes need to happen in the economic / social structures that will provide the right conditions for the introduction of CI. If they aren't going to set that out ... as a plan that they would try to work to ... then it should be dropped as an aim.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:19 pm

@RebeccaRiots

Nia Griffith's may have been referring to this ?
Plaid spinning the same **** as the Greens about Labour
http://vaughanwilliamsllanelli.blogspot.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

or it may be about an ex-Welsh Labour aide who is dissing the party, will not repeat some of the tweets, not sure if the allegations are his or from of the more rabid Plaid fans.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:23 pm

Afternoon all.

So was that the sum total of Cameron's speech - 'protecting school funding' which turned out not to protect it from rising NI/pension costs; and forcibly converting loads more schools which seems to be not possible anyway (if Dominic Cummings is to be believed)?

No wonder the DT relegated it to "Other news headlines". Not much there for a manifesto - they seem to be struggling to come up with anything new.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:23 pm

ErnstRemarx wrote:
pk1 wrote:The transcripts of the Q&A sessions today are here:

https://corporate.sky.com/media-centre/media-packs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cameron's isn't up there yet.

You know how good Ed was when even DFH said so !
David would have been much better, of course.

Obvs.....

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:25 pm

yahyah wrote:@RebeccaRiots

Nia Griffith's may have been referring to this ?
Plaid spinning the same **** as the Greens about Labour
http://vaughanwilliamsllanelli.blogspot.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

or it may be about an ex-Welsh Labour aide who is dissing the party, will not repeat some of the tweets, not sure if the allegations are his or from of the more rabid Plaid fans.

That blog post really is pants - a pile of pants. But I think it must be more specific than this and involve something to do with using constituents' experiences in some way given the tweet I originally saw from Nia Griffiths. What's the name of the ex-Welsh Labour aide?

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:25 pm

yahyah wrote:@RebeccaRiots

Nia Griffith's may have been referring to this ?
Plaid spinning the same **** as the Greens about Labour
http://vaughanwilliamsllanelli.blogspot.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

or it may be about an ex-Welsh Labour aide who is dissing the party, will not repeat some of the tweets, not sure if the allegations are his or from of the more rabid Plaid fans.

Tut, could at least tell us his name so we can look at the tweets for ourselves.....

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:26 pm

I think they probably can't drop without members agreeing, or something.

It won't be the last thing to go that way under scrutiny either.

The wealth tax (which is a good idea) is pencilled in to make £45bn. That'll have to be cut quite a bit. No idea why they can't agree something plausible. Perhaps they don't even want to, just be what I call "radical chic".

It's a shame because if they get into nitty gritty, they can show Labour up in the right way.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:27 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
yahyah wrote:@RebeccaRiots

Nia Griffith's may have been referring to this ?
Plaid spinning the same **** as the Greens about Labour
http://vaughanwilliamsllanelli.blogspot.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

or it may be about an ex-Welsh Labour aide who is dissing the party, will not repeat some of the tweets, not sure if the allegations are his or from of the more rabid Plaid fans.
That blog post really is pants - a pile of pants. But I think it must be more specific than this and involve something to do with using constituents' experiences in some way given the tweet I originally saw from Nia Griffiths. What's the name of the ex-Welsh Labour aide?

Luke Ellis.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:29 pm

ErnstRemarx wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:Not feasible in the short term?

What exactly happens to change that?
One would presume when genuine prosperity returns, then it would be affordable. I believe, though (willing to be corrected) that the Green's policy on economics is for a zero growth economy? If that's the case, then not feasible in the short term becomes not feasible full stop.

Zero growth isn't really a policy but something we should be relaxed about. They have a point about growth not being the best measure of wellbeing, but the markets won't be relaxed about them being relaxed about it. There'll be a premium for borrowing for a start.

As you say, without growth, their programme (if affordable now) becomes less so, rather rapidly.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 02 Feb, 2015 5:33 pm

Have PM'd you both [RR & PK].