Friday 9th October 2015

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 2:43 pm

Dear

On 1 December, if the Government gets its way, up to 2 million people will drop off the electoral register.

They will join another 8 million who are not on the register at all. That’s 10 million people – or 1 in 5 of all eligible adults – who won’t be able to vote.

That’s a national scandal.

1 December will be the single biggest act of disenfranchisement in our history. And it’s all happening because the Government is changing the way we register to vote.

If you share my outrage over this then join me in doing something about it:

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/s ... tion-drive" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Where people can’t vote, disaffection sets in. Where disaffection sets in, then extremism has a fertile breeding ground. That’s why we’re pulling together a broad range of organisations to run a huge Voter Registration drive in November – and I’d love you to get involved.

We’ll be organising voter registration drives all over the country – from faith and community groups, to students – and organising a massive social media campaign to spread the message.

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/s ... tion-drive" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These changes are happening because the Government is rushing changes to the way we register to vote, against the advice of its election watchdog, the Electoral Commission.

What’s more, our Parliamentary seats are about to be redrawn too (reducing the number of MPs from 650 to 600). Crucially, these will be based on the 1 December electoral register … which is about to lose nearly 2 million people.

Why is this a HOPE not hate issue? When people lose faith in the system or their ability to make change through the democratic process, they become easy prey for extremists.

Voting is the lifeblood of any democracy, so it’s vital that as many people are on the register as possible. If you agree, then please sign up and get involved.

http://action.hopenothate.org.uk/page/s ... tion-drive" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Let’s make November the month we reclaim our #MissingVoters.

Thanks

Nick

#MissingVoters
#NoVoteNoVoice

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 3:01 pm

ohsocynical wrote:I try to avoid watching BBC news or listening to them too. Unfortunately Mr Ohso had the TV on when I came in from the garden. They were on about the financial probelms in the NHS...

Confess I did a lot of swearing and shouting, so missed a lot of what they were saying, but from what I did hear, Hunt's name wasn't mentioned.
Caught what they were saying about agency staff costing too much, but seemed to fail to mention that was because a lot of regular NHS staff had been let go....

I was in the car with mr gilsey, listening to WatO on that subject, my reaction was much the same. He refrained from telling me to calm down, but only just.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 3:16 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
yahyah wrote:Having read Willow's post, must admit I had a small attack of worry when reading last night.
Again, it was Eatwell's book on Labour 1945-51.

It said Labour didn't get their message across post 1945 because it relied mainly on pamphlets and meetings, that the Tories did better.
Though Labour did get what remains their biggest ever vote in 1951, of course.......
And though Labour got a bigger share of the vote, the Tories got more seats - suggests the Tories were better at targeting support, which I suspect was the case in 2015.

(my bold)

Yes, exactly.
Tory material resources work to secure every electoral and media advantage.
Don't underestimate how what a lot of money in advertising can do.
I'm sorry for this, it's not right or fair.
It undermines democracy.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 3:38 pm

Jeremy Hunt forced to backtrack in row over NHS doctors’ contract
Health secretary retreats on pay and working hours as he seeks to head off possible strike action by 53,000 junior medics

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... pay-strike" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hobiejoe · Post by **Hobiejoe** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 4:11 pm

Afternoon.

One to file in the ever-growing You Couldn't Make It Up collection: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... nformation

And with the potted biogs of the members of the commission you don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce what their findings will be....

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 4:23 pm

Britain Elects
‏@britainelects

Aird & Loch Ness (Highland) stage results:
Liberal Democrat GAIN from SNP.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 4:48 pm

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 31 mins31 minutes ago

First YouGov London Mayor poll since the selections of Zac Goldsmith & Sadiq Khan sees the LAB candidate 2% ahead

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 5:30 pm

Job losses likely as B&Q announces Cardigan store closure
Read more: http://www.carmarthenjournal.co.uk/Job- ... z3o5Z8ICFI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is a big blow for Cardigan. Very precious jobs for an area with few alternatives. And we've no other large general hardware / equipment / household store.

And looks like B&Q don't have much confidence in west Wales ...

The other stores to go are in Deeside, Aberystwyth, Cardiff, Neath, Ebbw Vale, Cwmdu in Swansea, Gorseinon and Pembroke Dock...

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 5:47 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 31 mins31 minutes ago

First YouGov London Mayor poll since the selections of Zac Goldsmith & Sadiq Khan sees the LAB candidate 2% ahead

I assume the Standard is talking about the same poll- on headline it had neck and neck.

Corbyn and the new members ought to be positive in London, I reckon. Problem (apart from Johnson's personal following) has been low turnouts compared with general elections.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 5:47 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jeremy Hunt wants us to work harder and die younger, and have some self-respect about it
Deborah Orr

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 5:49 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Job losses likely as B&Q announces Cardigan store closure
Read more: http://www.carmarthenjournal.co.uk/Job- ... z3o5Z8ICFI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This is a big blow for Cardigan. Very precious jobs for an area with few alternatives. And we've no other large general hardware / equipment / household store.

And looks like B&Q don't have much confidence in west Wales ...
The other stores to go are in Deeside, Aberystwyth, Cardiff, Neath, Ebbw Vale, Cwmdu in Swansea, Gorseinon and Pembroke Dock...

Let's open a cooperative household hardware and gardening supply store.
Find someone with a lot of money and ask them to part with some of it in order to get the venture going.
Employ people, pay them well, their experience & time are worth a lot, sell quality products at a reasonable price.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 5:53 pm

Edited, unnecessarily provocative before.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 6:07 pm

The Dept of Health said no one was available to be interviewed by Radio 4 re the deficit in NHS trusts ... yesterday, this morning and again this evening. So Eddie Mair read out a list of the health ministers / spokespeople that supposedly aren't available and then said that instead of the interview they would play a bit of the theme music from Carry On Doctor - and they did.

This is getting beyond ridiculous now - the refusal of this government to give interviews about important issues for the various departments. I understand why Radio 4 did this - but somehow it felt like letting them get away with it yet again - because it was making light of their refusal to be accountable and present. Contrast with Heidi Alexander for Labour who did an interview and pointed out how serious the situation was and that Jeremy Hunt needed to get into gear and do something. Trouble is it makes Labour look like they are speaking at and to nothing ... it's not a good vacuum.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 6:11 pm

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2015/10/m ... gy-shares/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 6:16 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Job losses likely as B&Q announces Cardigan store closure
Read more: http://www.carmarthenjournal.co.uk/Job- ... z3o5Z8ICFI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This is a big blow for Cardigan. Very precious jobs for an area with few alternatives. And we've no other large general hardware / equipment / household store.

And looks like B&Q don't have much confidence in west Wales ...
The other stores to go are in Deeside, Aberystwyth, Cardiff, Neath, Ebbw Vale, Cwmdu in Swansea, Gorseinon and Pembroke Dock...

Although I doubt you'd get anyone to admit it, the lack of new homes and council housing has hit DIY stores... No matter how hard up when you move there are some things you need to buy...

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 6:33 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
Job losses likely as B&Q announces Cardigan store closure
Read more: http://www.carmarthenjournal.co.uk/Job- ... z3o5Z8ICFI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This is a big blow for Cardigan. Very precious jobs for an area with few alternatives. And we've no other large general hardware / equipment / household store.

And looks like B&Q don't have much confidence in west Wales ...
The other stores to go are in Deeside, Aberystwyth, Cardiff, Neath, Ebbw Vale, Cwmdu in Swansea, Gorseinon and Pembroke Dock...
Although I doubt you'd get anyone to admit it, the lack of new homes and council housing has hit DIY stores... No matter how hard up when you move there are some things you need to buy...

Agreed. Also, people usually want to slap on a bit of emulsion in colours of their own choice in order to "mark" their territory.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 6:35 pm

The DfE making up ethics on the hoof:

“Lord Nash has met all of the disclosure obligations and requirements with regards to this shareholding. This is not a conflict of interest in his role as an education minister.”

No-one said anything about education. It's as a member of the government.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 6:39 pm

alex thomson ‏@alextomo 2h2 hours ago
"The Prince of Darkness" breaks his silence - Greg Miskiw's first TV interview on hacking at News of the World. @Channel4News tonight

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 6:56 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Have been told that Mad Mel was mostly fairly reasonable on last night's QT, certainly in contrast to the reliably ghastly Patel?

Also that Lisa Nandy was excellent as ever

She was. Mad Mel being fairly reasonable, that is. The second or third time they went to her I braced myself for her answer and was stunned that she completely contradicted with what PP had declared. And, yes, Lisa Nandy was good.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 7:05 pm

The left’s use of social media is emboldening group mentalities and disconnecting activists from the views of the wider electorate, Tristram Hunt will say in a major speech urging Labour to remember its role as a party of government and not street protest.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... SApp_Other

If some of our wishy washy career polititions got their heads out of their asses and listened, this conversation wouldn't be taking place.
I reckon angry, working class people scares them to death.

The protest is going to come from the streets now whether he and his little gang like it or not. We're pissed off with waiting..If they can't see that, then they've no business being in the job.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 7:06 pm

Freedom of information commission not very free with its information

Source reveals cross-party commission is mulling charging for FoI requests after bizarre parliamentary briefing that members insisted must be off the record (Guardian)

Still, what can you expect with Jack Straw in the line-up?

The photo caption reads:

The five member committee is chaired by Lord Burns (far left) and includes (second left to right) Jack Straw, Lord Carlile, Dame Patricia Hodgson and Lord Howard. The Guardian is not permitted to disclose which members of the committee were present. Photograph: The Guardian/Rex

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... nformation

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 7:27 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
The left’s use of social media is emboldening group mentalities and disconnecting activists from the views of the wider electorate, Tristram Hunt will say in a major speech urging Labour to remember its role as a party of government and not street protest.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... SApp_Other
If some of our wishy washy career polititions got their heads out of their asses and listened, this conversation wouldn't be taking place.
I reckon angry, working class people scares them to death.

The protest is going to come from the streets now whether he and his little gang like it or not. We're pissed off with waiting..If they can't see that, then they've no business being in the job.

Say what you like about Hunt, he isn't a career politician.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 7:41 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
The left’s use of social media is emboldening group mentalities and disconnecting activists from the views of the wider electorate, Tristram Hunt will say in a major speech urging Labour to remember its role as a party of government and not street protest.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... SApp_Other
If some of our wishy washy career polititions got their heads out of their asses and listened, this conversation wouldn't be taking place.
I reckon angry, working class people scares them to death.

The protest is going to come from the streets now whether he and his little gang like it or not. We're pissed off with waiting..If they can't see that, then they've no business being in the job.

I confess I haven't the heart to read Tristram Hunt's article just now.
I have no idea what is in it; I hope he's not divisive.
I'm a Labour party member.

Also, apologies for my cooperative home-garden store idea.
I meant no harm but my post may come across as flippant.
It wasn't my intention.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:04 pm

This week, the film Suffragette premiered. It is a reminder of how the rights of women were not granted as acts of charity, but fought for, and at immense cost and considerable sacrifice. Last year, Pride told the story of LGBT activists in the 1980s who fought for dignity and equality at a time when they were ostracised and generally despised. Workers’ rights; laws against racist discrimination; the welfare state – all fought for, and at a cost that is not recognised enough. The rights and freedoms we all have today were won by British people who stood up against authority and injustice. Those are traditions; those are values that we should be proud of. If the left allows itself to be painted as the haters of Britain, it is doomed. But it can fight back, and it must.

They marched, spit, broke windows and made nuisances of themselves.

The East End went on to the streets and fought Mosley's black shirts...

If they'd waited for MPs to do anything about just those two things we'd still be waiting.

Edited to add: A lot of our MPs at that time sympathised with Mosley's views. As did our Royals. I bet you wouldn't need to dig too far under the surface to find the same today...

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:15 pm

Owen Smith ‏@OwenSmith_MP 14m14 minutes ago
Let's take the PM at his word: If they're the Workers Party, he'll vote to reverse tax credit cuts for workers, no? http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... CMP=twt_gu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:18 pm

Re Tristram Hunt's speech, I agree with this -

“Far from broadening the mind through access to the greatest library human beings have ever created, people’s experience of the internet is increasingly a narrow online world where anyone who puts their heads above the parapet can be the target of an anonymised digital mob.”

However, I don't agree with this -

“If you have a strong record of work, you should receive more help and protection for your home when you fall on hard times. Because right across the world countries with an entitlement based system such as ours are gripped by diminishing social support for the welfare state.”

not least because the pool of people who are afforded the opportunity of having "a strong record of work" is getting smaller and smaller (they are almost, bizarrely, moving into the position (or being "flattered" into thinking that they are) of being amongst the "privileged" - which is quite a clever means of getting them to identify with the Conservatives, now I come to think of it).

He's also, in the rest of his speech very "either or" when "either or" aren't necessarily applicable. Algorithmic, even, to use his terminology.

[Quotes are from the Guardian]

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:22 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
HindleA wrote:Press release for above

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fair ... ay-to-stay" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That is a disgrace and full of so much ammunition. Higher earners?

Also, "£3,500 subsidy" - when there is no bloody subsidy, just build-/loan-repayment cost, plus element for repairs/maintenance, plus management expenses, resulting in fair social rent. Hence, my rent for 2-bed built (to very high standards) in 1968 is £146 per week whereas in other parts of the borough 2-beds can be as low as £90pw - and one or two of the even newer build 2-beds are as much as £160pw. Private/BTL landlords on this estate charge up to £450pw for flats identical to mine. Plus, councils to administer the new market-rent scheme in return for 'reasonable' admin fee then give the rest (profits, just sheer clear bloody profits!) to Treasury but Housing Assocs keep everything!?

And, let's remember, those are household incomes they're talking about. A nurse, starting out, and their junior-lecturer wife, for example...

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:45 pm

Eight local council byelections this week, beginning with two on Wednesday:

Western Isles (no, I can't be bothered typing out the "official" name) Independent - or technically "no description" - hold in one of the more one sided contests seen anywhere recently, as the winning candidate took nearly 87% of first preferences. Another Indy took the very *very* distant runners up spot, with the Greens last on 5%. This was the only division here to be a totally non-party contest in 2007, but in 2012 the SNP stood somebody and got elected along with 3 Independents - despite that they did not contest this vacancy, nor an earlier one here in March that saw an Independent elected unopposed.

Cardiff - Labour hold, seeing off a determined Plaid challenge fairly comfortably in the end in a ward that split 2PC/1Lab in 2004 before Plaid took all the seats in 2008 (before a Labour gain in a 2011 byelection presaged a clean sweep the following year as they swept back into power in the Welsh capital) with only a very small swing to PC since 2012 - though a slightly larger one since another byelection the following year when Labour just managed half the vote. Other parties were very much also rans - Tories a distant 3rd (slightly down on 2012 but up on 2013) then UKIP with nearly 5% (almost unchanged on their only previous showing in 2013) then the Greens who were down on their last contest in 2012 after not fighting the byelection, and finally the LibDems (though this is an area where they have never been strong)

Bolsover DC - Labour hold in a ward that returned two councillors unopposed this May, as in 2007 and 2003; the only recent contest saw them beat a lone Tory by about 2 to 1 in 2011. This time round they did not have it their own way, however, as UKIP came a decent second with 23% with the Tories not far behind and TUSC coming their usual last but posting a notably strong performance for them - 14% (their candidate has polled decently in a nearby seat in the past) Whilst good for UKIP, this result falls short of when they came close to embarrassing Labour in a neighbouring seat (which also had a history of unopposed returns and a similar 2011 result) at the start of the year - they will be thankful in retrospect nobody split the "left" vote then.

Highland - LibDem gain from SNP, the latters first reverse in a Scottish election since the referendum (June 2014, in fact) despite the fact they increased their poll modestly on 2012 (when this division split 2Ind/1Nat/1LD, as in 2007) due to the LibDem share rocketing upwards as they went from a poor fourth on first preferences last time to narrowly top now, with an increase of over 20%. They were likely helped by the decision of Labour not to stand here after doing so in the last two elections, and also a slump in the Independent vote as the sole non-party candidate took less than 10% and were nearly caught by the Greens in their first electoral outing here. Also benefiting from this was the Tory candidate, as they claimed a respectable third with a healthy increase on three years ago, continuing their recent run of decent showings north of the border.

South Oxfordshire DC - Tory hold, though they were run close by the LibDems after a swing of over 10% since their comfortable victory here in May (this was the first election after boundary changes, though the LibDems have some previous history in this area taking the main predecessor ward here in 2003 - though the Tories had made it safe by 2011) Labour dropped a bit on GE day - when they were not far behind the LibDems - though not as much as the Greens (then close behind Labour) whose share more than halved to just 7%.

Woking DC - a neighbouring pair of LibDem defences, but rather contrasting results. The first was a narrow hold but that does not really tell the full story; this was the last LibDem seat here after the Tories broke through in 2011 capturing one of the seats in a double vacancy (it had previously voted LibDem in every election since 2002) and then took another in 2014, before they triumphed by almost 2 to 1 on GE day - this result was a therefore a swing to the LibDems of over 11% since then. Labour fell back a bit since then (when they weren't far behind in 3rd) whilst UKIP were little changed with just under 10%. The other result, however, saw a Tory gain in a seat that has voted LibDem at regular two yearly intervals since 2002 - though the most recent 2014 contest was the closest yet, so the relatively modest swing the Tories achieved here this time was enough to win. In fact the LibDem share was almost unchanged, and Labour actually advanced a little - the Tories had the decline of UKIP to thank as their vote fell to little more than 10%, barely half their previous showing.

South Hams DC - Green hold, by a handful of votes and with just over 30%; this is Totnes which has become known as a stronghold of "alternative" lifestyles and this was reflected in the results in May (again, the first since boundary changes) when the Greens picked up 2 out of 3 seats here and would likely have made a clean sweep had they put another candidate up. This time round, however, the LibDems moved from third (and narrowly missing out on a seat then) to within a few votes of victory with a double figure increase - leapfrogging Labour who had snatched the third seat then, though the reds also managed to modestly increase their share this time - ahead of the Tories who were little changed. Both UKIP and TUSC stood on GE day (and both polled respectably in a very fragmented contest) but sat this one out - however a supposed Independent (in fact well known locally as a BNP activist) tried their luck this time, but scored just 3%.

A bit quieter next week - three contests.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:51 pm

Edited.

And early provocative comment deleted.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:56 pm

PorFavor wrote:Re Tristram Hunt's speech, I agree with this -

“Far from broadening the mind through access to the greatest library human beings have ever created, people’s experience of the internet is increasingly a narrow online world where anyone who puts their heads above the parapet can be the target of an anonymised digital mob.”
However, I don't agree with this -

“If you have a strong record of work, you should receive more help and protection for your home when you fall on hard times. Because right across the world countries with an entitlement based system such as ours are gripped by diminishing social support for the welfare state.”
not least because the pool of people who are afforded the opportunity of having "a strong record of work" is getting smaller and smaller (they are almost, bizarrely, moving into the position (or being "flattered" into thinking that they are) of being amongst the "privileged" - which is quite a clever means of getting them to identify with the Conservatives, now I come to think of it).

He's also, in the rest of his speech very "either or" when "either or" aren't necessarily applicable. Algorithmic, even, to use his terminology.

[Quotes are from the Guardian]

How do children show a "strong record of work"?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:56 pm

PorFavor wrote:Re Tristram Hunt's speech, I agree with this -

“Far from broadening the mind through access to the greatest library human beings have ever created, people’s experience of the internet is increasingly a narrow online world where anyone who puts their heads above the parapet can be the target of an anonymised digital mob.”
However, I don't agree with this -

“If you have a strong record of work, you should receive more help and protection for your home when you fall on hard times. Because right across the world countries with an entitlement based system such as ours are gripped by diminishing social support for the welfare state.”
not least because the pool of people who are afforded the opportunity of having "a strong record of work" is getting smaller and smaller (they are almost, bizarrely, moving into the position (or being "flattered" into thinking that they are) of being amongst the "privileged" - which is quite a clever means of getting them to identify with the Conservatives, now I come to think of it).

He's also, in the rest of his speech very "either or" when "either or" aren't necessarily applicable. Algorithmic, even, to use his terminology.

[Quotes are from the Guardian]

They haven't the guts to stand out against all the cuts but know they'd lose a lot of support if they said they agreed with them.

They're straddling the fence. It won't work any more. Too many desperate people. And more to come shortly.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:58 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PorFavor wrote:Re Tristram Hunt's speech, I agree with this -

“Far from broadening the mind through access to the greatest library human beings have ever created, people’s experience of the internet is increasingly a narrow online world where anyone who puts their heads above the parapet can be the target of an anonymised digital mob.”
However, I don't agree with this -

“If you have a strong record of work, you should receive more help and protection for your home when you fall on hard times. Because right across the world countries with an entitlement based system such as ours are gripped by diminishing social support for the welfare state.”
not least because the pool of people who are afforded the opportunity of having "a strong record of work" is getting smaller and smaller (they are almost, bizarrely, moving into the position (or being "flattered" into thinking that they are) of being amongst the "privileged" - which is quite a clever means of getting them to identify with the Conservatives, now I come to think of it).

He's also, in the rest of his speech very "either or" when "either or" aren't necessarily applicable. Algorithmic, even, to use his terminology.

[Quotes are from the Guardian]
How do children show a "strong record of work"?

And that, of course.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 8:59 pm

PorFavor wrote:Re Tristram Hunt's speech, I agree with this -

“Far from broadening the mind through access to the greatest library human beings have ever created, people’s experience of the internet is increasingly a narrow online world where anyone who puts their heads above the parapet can be the target of an anonymised digital mob.”
However, I don't agree with this -

“If you have a strong record of work, you should receive more help and protection for your home when you fall on hard times. Because right across the world countries with an entitlement based system such as ours are gripped by diminishing social support for the welfare state.”
not least because the pool of people who are afforded the opportunity of having "a strong record of work" is getting smaller and smaller (they are almost, bizarrely, moving into the position (or being "flattered" into thinking that they are) of being amongst the "privileged" - which is quite a clever means of getting them to identify with the Conservatives, now I come to think of it).

He's also, in the rest of his speech very "either or" when "either or" aren't necessarily applicable. Algorithmic, even, to use his terminology.

[Quotes are from the Guardian]

Ed Miliband started to develop the contributory principle, but then appeared to back off. I'm not sure how much made it into the final manifesto but I personally feel it's worth exploring. Most people who have been made redundant find a new job within a few months, but with no help with mortgage payments and subsistence level unemployment benefits, some of those people will go under -savings and house gone, they quickly find themselves dependent on the state long term. If contributory based unemployment benefits are about giving the newly unemployed more, I'm all for it. Up to 6 months, it could stop a lot of people falling off a cliff. It certainly shouldn't be about leaving the long-term unemployed or school leavers below the breadline. I'm a big believer in income support for every single person, regardless of circumstance, to ensure everyone can access the basics of food, warmth and shelter. For me contributions based benefits should provide over and above that basic minimum and would help re-enforce the insurance element of NI and the idea that we pay in, so we can take out in times of need. Finding a way to address the "why should I pay for other people's children" mentality is vital. I don't know if the contributory principle is the answer, but I certainly think it worth considering.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:00 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
They haven't the guts to stand out against all the cuts but know they'd lose a lot of support if they said they agreed with them.

They're straddling the fence. It won't work any more. Too many desperate people. And more to come shortly.

I think it's worse than that- he's reaching for some "radical" policy.

I can see why they do that, because otherwise you just look like you're trying to keep up with the government.

That quote about a "solid record of work" is laughably bad. Miliband paid lip service to it, then wisely dropped it. Unless you're going to increase the amount of tax, there's not going to be the money for social protection like he wants.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:13 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
They haven't the guts to stand out against all the cuts but know they'd lose a lot of support if they said they agreed with them.

They're straddling the fence. It won't work any more. Too many desperate people. And more to come shortly.
I think it's worse than that- he's reaching for some "radical" policy.

I can see why they do that, because otherwise you just look like you're trying to keep up with the government.

That quote about a "solid record of work" is laughably bad. Miliband paid lip service to it, then wisely dropped it. Unless you're going to increase the amount of tax, there's not going to be the money for social protection like he wants.

Is the idea of raising NI to provide a proper safety net for long term workers who suddenly find themselves redundant in an economic downturn really a non-starter? Doesn't Germany have such a system? How come we can't afford what other, comparable economies can? If voters will only vote for tax cuts, Labour might as well throw in the towell now.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:18 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PorFavor wrote:Re Tristram Hunt's speech, I agree with this -

“Far from broadening the mind through access to the greatest library human beings have ever created, people’s experience of the internet is increasingly a narrow online world where anyone who puts their heads above the parapet can be the target of an anonymised digital mob.”
However, I don't agree with this -

“If you have a strong record of work, you should receive more help and protection for your home when you fall on hard times. Because right across the world countries with an entitlement based system such as ours are gripped by diminishing social support for the welfare state.”
not least because the pool of people who are afforded the opportunity of having "a strong record of work" is getting smaller and smaller (they are almost, bizarrely, moving into the position (or being "flattered" into thinking that they are) of being amongst the "privileged" - which is quite a clever means of getting them to identify with the Conservatives, now I come to think of it).

He's also, in the rest of his speech very "either or" when "either or" aren't necessarily applicable. Algorithmic, even, to use his terminology.

[Quotes are from the Guardian]
How do children show a "strong record of work"?

A lot of our young, if the Tories get in again, will never know what a 'steady' decent paying job is through no fault of their own.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:26 pm

Willow904 wrote: Is the idea of raising NI to provide a proper safety net for long term workers who suddenly find themselves redundant in an economic downturn really a non-starter? Doesn't Germany have such a system? How come we can't afford what other, comparable economies can? If voters will only vote for tax cuts, Labour might as well throw in the towell now.

It might be a starter, but NI's basically seen as a tax by too many people.

It will be very tough re tax in general. For one thing, Osborne is ultimately more sensitive to slow growth than slow deficit reduction. He'll cut taxes to stimulate the economy.

No need to give up, but hard work to be done.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:35 pm

Allowing people to go to the wall because of temporary blips such as short-term sickness or unemployment comes at a price of social and economic costs down the road. Gordon Brown understood this when he shortened the qualifying period for mortgage interest relief to 2 months after the 2008 crash. No one questioned then whether we could afford it. The truth was we couldn't afford not to. Imagine if all those people had lost their homes, owed money because of negative equity and were facing higher rents than their old mortgage with less income from their new job. The top up housing benefit bill could well be much higher even than it is now.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:45 pm

I agree with you, and hope that case can be made.

Cuts in social security often just cause more costs (monetary or otherwise) further down the road.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:50 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Willow904 wrote: Is the idea of raising NI to provide a proper safety net for long term workers who suddenly find themselves redundant in an economic downturn really a non-starter? Doesn't Germany have such a system? How come we can't afford what other, comparable economies can? If voters will only vote for tax cuts, Labour might as well throw in the towell now.
It might be a starter, but NI's basically seen as a tax by too many people.

It will be very tough re tax in general. For one thing, Osborne is ultimately more sensitive to slow growth than slow deficit reduction. He'll cut taxes to stimulate the economy.

No need to give up, but hard work to be done.

Oh, he cuts taxes to stimulate the economy. I thought he did it so he didn't accidently reduce the deficit with the proceeds of growth and thus run out of excuses as to why we can't afford the NHS or poor people.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:51 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Willow904 wrote: Is the idea of raising NI to provide a proper safety net for long term workers who suddenly find themselves redundant in an economic downturn really a non-starter? Doesn't Germany have such a system? How come we can't afford what other, comparable economies can? If voters will only vote for tax cuts, Labour might as well throw in the towell now.
It might be a starter, but NI's basically seen as a tax by too many people.

It will be very tough re tax in general. For one thing, Osborne is ultimately more sensitive to slow growth than slow deficit reduction. He'll cut taxes to stimulate the economy.

No need to give up, but hard work to be done.

National Insurance

Tory government puts a lot of time and resources trying to make NI 'seen as a tax by too many people'.
I agree it's hard work to challenge the undermining of social security provision.

What tax can Osborne cut to stimulate the economy?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:52 pm

: joke.jpg (88.1 KiB) Viewed 5035 times

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 9:56 pm

Willow904 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Willow904 wrote: Is the idea of raising NI to provide a proper safety net for long term workers who suddenly find themselves redundant in an economic downturn really a non-starter? Doesn't Germany have such a system? How come we can't afford what other, comparable economies can? If voters will only vote for tax cuts, Labour might as well throw in the towell now.
It might be a starter, but NI's basically seen as a tax by too many people.

It will be very tough re tax in general. For one thing, Osborne is ultimately more sensitive to slow growth than slow deficit reduction. He'll cut taxes to stimulate the economy.

No need to give up, but hard work to be done.
Oh, he cuts taxes to stimulate the economy. I thought he did it so he didn't accidently reduce the deficit with the proceeds of growth and thus run out of excuses as to why we can't afford the NHS or poor people.

He was helping himself to a billion underspend of NHS funds in 2012. And it more or less went under the radar...

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 10:11 pm

Decent response from Corbyn to Cameron's bollocks earlier this week. Just needs to be quicker next time. Although using the rattled line isn't great, perhaps next time claim he is resorting to personal abuse to distract from the fundamental weakness of his arguments.

People won't believe Cameron is rattled, but they might see his one nation stuff as a very thin PR veneer if this point is repeatedly rammed home.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 10:46 pm

Government planning £7bn assault on 'gold plated' final salary pension schemes
Exclusive: Middle class, white collar workers will lose thousands of pounds in what could be the biggest attack on public sector pensions to date

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/pers ... hemes.html

Do you think he's decided to copy Brown?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 10:48 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
Government planning £7bn assault on 'gold plated' final salary pension schemes
Exclusive: Middle class, white collar workers will lose thousands of pounds in what could be the biggest attack on public sector pensions to date

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/pers ... hemes.html

Do you think he's decided to copy Brown?

Gotta love the DT with a picture of what is clearly a Staff Nurse with the caption about "Senior doctors"!

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 11:13 pm

Latest amendments Welfare and Work Bill,some added today.

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/201 ... ments.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re SMI conversion to interest bearing loan plus charges regardless of circumstance.
I note a,Labour attempt to protect current SMI recipients for at least a year and make it a affirmative resolution of both houses ,rather than just a SI.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 11:29 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 31 mins31 minutes ago

First YouGov London Mayor poll since the selections of Zac Goldsmith & Sadiq Khan sees the LAB candidate 2% ahead

Good start. Gives Sadiq something to build on but should prevent any sense of complacency in the campaign ahead...

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 11:43 pm

Willow904 wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Willow904 wrote: Is the idea of raising NI to provide a proper safety net for long term workers who suddenly find themselves redundant in an economic downturn really a non-starter? Doesn't Germany have such a system? How come we can't afford what other, comparable economies can? If voters will only vote for tax cuts, Labour might as well throw in the towell now.
It might be a starter, but NI's basically seen as a tax by too many people.

It will be very tough re tax in general. For one thing, Osborne is ultimately more sensitive to slow growth than slow deficit reduction. He'll cut taxes to stimulate the economy.

No need to give up, but hard work to be done.
Oh, he cuts taxes to stimulate the economy. I thought he did it so he didn't accidently reduce the deficit with the proceeds of growth and thus run out of excuses as to why we can't afford the NHS or poor people.

That as well.

Cameron famously said the £10k personal allowance was unaffordable.

How times change.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Fri 09 Oct, 2015 11:43 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 31 mins31 minutes ago

First YouGov London Mayor poll since the selections of Zac Goldsmith & Sadiq Khan sees the LAB candidate 2% ahead
Good start. Gives Sadiq something to build on but should prevent any sense of complacency in the campaign ahead...

I think Khan genuinely brings something different to the contest. Goldsmith is going to find this pretty difficult. Add in the inevitable dip in government popularity, and the fact the capital is pretty good for Labour and a result is entirely possible.