In the article we are commenting on. Is trying to do that exactly. There is no other reason to word it that way. The hole exists. Applying a possessive to the term to the government announcing it is entirely to try and remove it from the previse government.
It is an openly biased choice of wording.
It is quoted to indicate it is a questionable fact. And applied to labours possession to imply labour are trying to use the lie to increase spending.
No I don’t think so. I certainly didn’t read it like you’re reading it.
Who owns the fiscal hole? Labour currently do as they are the government.
Labour’s fiscal hole.
It is an openly biased choice of wording.
We’ll have to disagree on that. But if you feel strongly then you can always write to the press complaints commission and ask for a retraction or rewording?
That was the whole point of my original comment.
My point was the wording
Labour’s “fiscal hole”.
In the article we are commenting on. Is trying to do that exactly. There is no other reason to word it that way. The hole exists. Applying a possessive to the term to the government announcing it is entirely to try and remove it from the previse government.
It is an openly biased choice of wording.
It is quoted to indicate it is a questionable fact. And applied to labours possession to imply labour are trying to use the lie to increase spending.
No I don’t think so. I certainly didn’t read it like you’re reading it.
We’ll have to disagree on that. But if you feel strongly then you can always write to the press complaints commission and ask for a retraction or rewording?
Lol. Press complaints commission don’t care about bias.
Try adding the quotes back into the phrase you copied. Really changes the intent.
OK, well you can either complain to the press complaints commission, to the FT, to the Labour party, or me.
One of these options isn’t going to give a shit.