FlyTheNest

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:12 pm**

Blimey how did I miss the Esther McVey story? This is what happens when you're not on Twitter I guess.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:19 pm**

Disability News Service has an interesting story on Maximus and the WCA contract.

I posted here a while ago about the same people being behind Maximus in the UK as were behind Atos and Unum, so I won't do it again...

This story mentions that; but it also says that the only other bidder was Interserve, who were underbid by Maximus by £50 Million.

Personally, I'm in no doubt that Maximus would have got that contract anyway - lower bid or not - because of who's behind the scenes.

The head honcho of Interserve is Lord Norman Blackwell who was a policy adviser to Thatcher. You'd think, with him in charge and his company being a British FTSE 250 company to boot, that the Tories would love it - but no.

We get Maximus, a US corporation well known for sharp practice and worse, pretending to be a completely different thing (Health Management Limited which it owns) with the same people making the decisions and the same people behind the scenes issuing statements saying they're not involved with the delivery of the contract etc. etc. etc.

The ubiquitous DWP spokesthing says that "The value of the contract, specification and REDACTED terms and conditions and schedules will be published on Contracts Finder in the usual way by the end of November". I'm sure it will, And it'll tell us nowt.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:24 pm**

StephenDolan wrote:Blimey how did I miss the Esther McVey story? This is what happens when you're not on Twitter I guess.

Can you expand on that please ? What McVey story ??

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:27 pm**

pk1 wrote:Missed the speech but I went to Andrews blog to find out the answer to the question posed by TE

Q: (From the BBC’s Ben Wright) Who are these vested interests out to get you? And aren’t you in danger of sounding paranoid?
Wowsers, whoda thunked it - the BBC !

Andrew also posted some tweets, one of which was by Paul Waugh:

Paul Waugh @paulwaugh

Perils of holding press + party Q and A, journalists hissed at (@chrisshipitv) or heckled (@andybell5news) by members. Is that a good look?
Not sure if Waugh means Andy Bell is a member, a heckler or both but was EM heckled today or is this something that happened previously as the hissing was (when ITV asked Ed a question about his leadership at the CBI the other day) ?

My reading of it is that Ship & Bell were heckled/hissed at by Labour party members at the speech. And quite right too.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:29 pm**

pk1 wrote:Missed the speech but I went to Andrews blog to find out the answer to the question posed by TE

Q: (From the BBC’s Ben Wright) Who are these vested interests out to get you? And aren’t you in danger of sounding paranoid?
Wowsers, whoda thunked it - the BBC !

Andrew also posted some tweets, one of which was by Paul Waugh:

Paul Waugh @paulwaugh

Perils of holding press + party Q and A, journalists hissed at (@chrisshipitv) or heckled (@andybell5news) by members. Is that a good look?
Not sure if Waugh means Andy Bell is a member, a heckler or both but was EM heckled today or is this something that happened previously as the hissing was (when ITV asked Ed a question about his leadership at the CBI the other day) ?

There was a tiny bit of hissing/booing when a couple of the journos trotted out their Lynton-approved questions, nothing on the scale of what happened at the CBI; it was late on by which time most of the audience were getting very obviously hacked off (so to speak) with the constant flogging of the dead horse. Waugh is over egging the pudding, as usual, classic concern trolling.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:35 pm**

citizenJA wrote:Paul Burstow MP
@PaulBurstow
Lib Dem MP for Sutton, Cheam & Worcester Park. Chair, CentreForum Mental Health & Demos Residential Care Commissions.

Is on

http://carersworldradio.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's not doing well - patronising, inaccurate

Andy has just showed up

I posted that

Anne McGuire MP
@AnneMcGuireMP
Labour MP for Stirling. Former Minister and Shadow Minister for Disabled People.

was speaking - I can't confirm that the Anne I've listened to is actually the person above. I'll research more. I can't believe I can't find out.

Someone is talking about deaths having gone up by an incredible amount...

It is her.
Burstow ,I used to have a lot of time for,knowledgeable and committed.It is for this reason I simply cannot understand his voting as default "necessary rooms for care medical purposes as spare subject to penalisation ";the inclusion of Carers Allowance in the benefit cap;and the scrapping of the "Caring with Confidence" course a particularly petty act when Minister.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:38 pm**

pk1 wrote: There was a bit about that in the Graun the other day:

It has been a longstanding, if not greatly publicised, practice in Westminster for opposition parties to receive support from the major accountancy companies in formulating their policies, particularly ahead of general elections.
Fine for Cons & LDs - not fine for Labour seems to be the thinking

I didn't know they did that. Thanks, pk1 and TE - shows how much I know....d'oh. And Mike too.....

I thought that's what Short Money was for. Labour get more than £6 Million in Short Money - I know that's supposed to be for the expenses associated with being in opposition, but doesn't paying for policy support count? I suppose it's not a lot of cash really.

I suppose it makes sense to get some bean-counters in (if you haven't got enough of your own) to cost stuff you're planning, and if they all do it then Mike's article is a bit silly, on reflection. I wonder if he realises that?

I seem to recall Balls saying that all his policies were costed and asking the OBR or someone to check them out - then I remember someone saying that Osborne put the kibosh on that, then set the Treasury to work checking them out in secret.
Did I recall rightly?

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:43 pm**

pk1 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Blimey how did I miss the Esther McVey story? This is what happens when you're not on Twitter I guess.
Can you expand on that please ? What McVey story ??

The Sack Esther McVey Day "hanging" comments. A quick link unfortunately

http://www.politicshome.com/uk/story/45382/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:43 pm**

pk1 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Blimey how did I miss the Esther McVey story? This is what happens when you're not on Twitter I guess.
Can you expand on that please ? What McVey story ??

Take a look at the Mail today - if you can bear to PK.
And there's this development.

: McDonnellToShappsReEstherMcVeyStory.jpg (35.04 KiB) Viewed 16288 times

https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP

John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 1h1 hour ago
For the record, here's the letter I wrote to Tory Shapps to tell him to stop peddling untruths about me. pic.twitter.com/yh8mKRhKOD

Details
John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 7h7 hours ago
I see the Daily Mail is having a go at me. I wear any attack by the once Hitler supporting Daily Mail as a badge of honour.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:47 pm**

pk1 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Blimey how did I miss the Esther McVey story? This is what happens when you're not on Twitter I guess.
Can you expand on that please ? What McVey story ??

There was a comedy night in London on Sunday, "Tony Benn Night" at which John McDonnell related a story from a "SackEstherMcVeyDay" event in Liverpool.
McDonnell told the audience that while he was there, someone said she shouldn't be sacked she should be lynched. He didn't personally say she should be lynched.

There was a bit of a kerfuffle on Twitter about it, and today the Mail are calling for his sacking and claiming that the Tories are demanding Labour remove the whip, etc. etc.
The Mail article is pretty much what'd you'd expect - the comments are not as nasty about Labour or McDonnell as you might expect.
Seems even Mail readers hate McVey.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:48 pm**

Labour also have access to the civil service from around now. It used to be nine months out from an election, but Dave changed that to six because he could. So he did.

But I don't think it is a good idea to have this company so near to government and parties. The same people advising all parties? Whose policy will we end up with? PWC, that's whose.

Labour should invest in its own research dept to produce fine detail policy. There's nothing special about these big companies and no particular reason to think they are more knowledgeable or wise than any one else. But they are certainly more self-interested than independent academics or Labour's own researchers studying international and domestic practices. Can we really trust this company not to be flogging the fact that it has this influence to other commercial clients. I would say they almost inevitably will be doing that.

It may be 'longstanding' but it did not happen in the 1970s so far as I know.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:50 pm**

HindleA wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Paul Burstow MP
@PaulBurstow
Lib Dem MP for Sutton, Cheam & Worcester Park. Chair, CentreForum Mental Health & Demos Residential Care Commissions.

Is on

http://carersworldradio.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's not doing well - patronising, inaccurate

Andy has just showed up

I posted that

Anne McGuire MP
@AnneMcGuireMP
Labour MP for Stirling. Former Minister and Shadow Minister for Disabled People.

was speaking - I can't confirm that the Anne I've listened to is actually the person above. I'll research more. I can't believe I can't find out.

Someone is talking about deaths having gone up by an incredible amount...

It is her.
Burstow ,I used to have a lot of time for,knowledgeable and committed.It is for this reason I simply cannot understand his voting as default "necessary rooms for care medical purposes as spare subject to penalisation ";the inclusion of Carers Allowance in the benefit cap;and the scrapping of the "Caring with Confidence" course a particularly petty act when Minister.

Thank you, HindleA! I've updated my initial comment & I'll not post until I've got all the information from now on. By the end of the broadcast, people were quite animated & angry. I don't blame them at all. Wow, Anne McGuire is good. I don't know anything about Burstow - he just wasn't as informed & centred as McGuire.

On the Carers World Radio rolling call in blog I caught

"Pledges??" from one calling in followed swiftly by
"Oh, no!!" from another

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:52 pm**

Nov 13 2014, 3:48 PM

onmybiketoo (guest):
I do hope the ministers heard and understand the anger.

http://carersworldradio.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:53 pm**

rebeccariots2 wrote:
pk1 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Blimey how did I miss the Esther McVey story? This is what happens when you're not on Twitter I guess.
Can you expand on that please ? What McVey story ??
Take a look at the Mail today - if you can bear to PK.
And there's this development.
McDonnellToShappsReEstherMcVeyStory.jpg
https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP

John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 1h1 hour ago
For the record, here's the letter I wrote to Tory Shapps to tell him to stop peddling untruths about me. pic.twitter.com/yh8mKRhKOD

Details
John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 7h7 hours ago
I see the Daily Mail is having a go at me. I wear any attack by the once Hitler supporting Daily Mail as a badge of honour.

Ha ha. I really like McDonnell, and his retort to the Wail is excellent stuff. Unlike Shapps, it's also factually correct.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 3:56 pm**

https://twitter.com/hashtag/carerssummi ... e&src=hash" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There doesn't seem to be an alternative to get the information for the broadcast.
I need some tea.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:09 pm**

More fun on Universal Credit.

DWP has decided to cut payments to claimants if they get into arrears thus -
If someone on UC has problems paying their landlords directly, DWP can arrange to have the housing element of UC paid direct to the landlord.
Until now, if the person was in arrears with their rent, DWP guidance said that 5% of the remaining UC after rent could be diverted before the claimant gets it and sent directly to the landlord to "help" the claimant reduce their arrears.
Now, they have decided that they will take between 10% and 20% of the remainder of the UC - this, apparently, is to ensure that claimants get "back on track" with their rent arrears faster. The claimant, obviously, has no choice.

So - what next? What if they don't like the look of what the claimants' bank statements say about how they spend their UC? Will they "ensure" they only spend it on the correct things? What if someone spends a fiver on the bingo?

FFS.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:11 pm**

Nov 13 2014, 4:06 PM
Guest8958 (guest):

Natalie says 'What about difficulty and tension around increasing productivity and maintaining quality of care??
Caring involves a relationship, time with people, can't triple number of people of care and provide same quality of care'

http://carersworldradio.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:20 pm**

mikems wrote:Labour also have access to the civil service from around now. It used to be nine months out from an election, but Dave changed that to six because he could. So he did.

But I don't think it is a good idea to have this company so near to government and parties. The same people advising all parties? Whose policy will we end up with? PWC, that's whose.

Labour should invest in its own research dept to produce fine detail policy. There's nothing special about these big companies and no particular reason to think they are more knowledgeable or wise than any one else. But they are certainly more self-interested than independent academics or Labour's own researchers studying international and domestic practices. Can we really trust this company not to be flogging the fact that it has this influence to other commercial clients. I would say they almost inevitably will be doing that.

It may be 'longstanding' but it did not happen in the 1970s so far as I know.

Assuming you need very qualified individuals to do this work you might be looking at say 8 people at about 200k overhead each. You need this on a long duration basis (good staff won't take a 6 month contract) you are looking at annual liability of 1.6 million pa.

Seems unlikely. Contract rates are probably 1k per person per day.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:21 pm**

ohsocynical wrote:
WelshIan wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Miliband's speech is here

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1025242 ... nate-house" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Even just reading it, that's inspiring - the hairs on the back of my neck stood up.

Also thought he dealt with Nick Robinson well on the News at Ten last night. No wonder the tories and other vested interests are so scared of what he can bring to this country.
I wonder what the right wingers will come up with next. I have visions of them feverishly digging into Labour MP's pasts in the vain hope they can come up with something --- anything.

I always wondered if that was behind the break in to Eds' office,,.But seeing as Ed is actually one of the good guys(remember his were the lowest expenses)they failed to find any dirt.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:25 pm**

Welcome to MorganLlan

The most recent press-briefing from the European Space Agency is at the link below. It includes some more wonderful pictures from Philae on the surface of comet 67P and updates on the rather bouncy and springy landing it went through. It came to rest some way away from where it first touched down, in the shadow of a cliff, and with two feet firmly on the ground but the third seemingly sticking out into space. Whether or not they try to correct that will depend on its exact location being identified and a look at the data they collect when Rosetta swings around, later, to relay that data to earth. Regardless, the comms are working and most of the instruments (some need an instruction to switch on) so the science is going ahead.

http://new.livestream.com/ESA/cometland ... s/67965864

And here is the first (unprocessed) panoramic taken by the cameras onboard Philae:

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:35 pm**

Thanks for the info about McDonnell & McVey - I had no idea.

Good old John though

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:35 pm**

TE

Assuming yAssuming you need very qualified individuals to do this work you might be looking at say 8 people at about 200k overhead each. You need this on a long duration basis (good staff won't take a 6 month contract) you are looking at annual liability of 1.6 million pa.

Seems unlikely. Contract rates are probably 1k per person per day.ou need very qualified individuals to do this work you might be looking at say 8 people at about 200k overhead each. You need this on a long duration basis (good staff won't take a 6 month contract) you are looking at annual liability of 1.6 million pa.

Seems unlikely. Contract rates are probably 1k per person per day.

How on earth did we manage before this accounting cartel arose? The Labour and TU research departments were good enough for Attlee, who set up a comprehensive system of progressive taxation.

PWC will not be offering pro-people advice to any party, they will be reinforcing the current set up because it is in their interests.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:37 pm**

ephemerid wrote:More fun on Universal Credit.

DWP has decided to cut payments to claimants if they get into arrears thus -
If someone on UC has problems paying their landlords directly, DWP can arrange to have the housing element of UC paid direct to the landlord.
Until now, if the person was in arrears with their rent, DWP guidance said that 5% of the remaining UC after rent could be diverted before the claimant gets it and sent directly to the landlord to "help" the claimant reduce their arrears.
Now, they have decided that they will take between 10% and 20% of the remainder of the UC - this, apparently, is to ensure that claimants get "back on track" with their rent arrears faster. The claimant, obviously, has no choice.

So - what next? What if they don't like the look of what the claimants' bank statements say about how they spend their UC? Will they "ensure" they only spend it on the correct things? What if someone spends a fiver on the bingo?

FFS.

One of the first acts of the Government was for the DWP to pay our housing support(a small but crucial amount in mortgage interest) directly to the lender,rather than "via "our bank account.We received our first and hopefully only "warning "letter that we hadn't made our monthly payment,they were late paying.I know some think it is wrong for homeowners to receive any such support(all parties are moving to at least time limiting it for all,or else recouped with interest)but I would just point out it saves money given any alternative and a condition for a DFG is that you cannot move for at least five years anyway.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:38 pm**

A poster at UKPR claims to work for News Intl - whether he does or not, I have no idea but I guess they even use tea-boys there.

Anyway, he said this today:

PRESSMAN
A meeting the other day in which it was confirmed that Boris will trail EM throughout the campaign, a sort of omnipresent bully who’s exploits will then be reported on the next day.

Something to look out for in the coming months.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:41 pm**

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 57090.html

Oh f**k. I just used an emergency dentist that wasn't the cleanest! I remarked on it to Mr Ohso, but was in so much pain I only noticed the blood stained waiting room carpet and dust bunnies in the corners of the surgery after they'd laid hands on me.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:42 pm**

pk1 wrote:A poster at UKPR claims to work for News Intl - whether he does or not, I have no idea but I guess they even use tea-boys there.

Anyway, he said this today:

PRESSMAN
A meeting the other day in which it was confirmed that Boris will trail EM throughout the campaign, a sort of omnipresent bully who’s exploits will then be reported on the next day.
Something to look out for in the coming months.

Crosby's probably banned Boris from stalking Dave then. Shows what deep trouble they're in.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:49 pm**

mikems wrote:TE

Assuming yAssuming you need very qualified individuals to do this work you might be looking at say 8 people at about 200k overhead each. You need this on a long duration basis (good staff won't take a 6 month contract) you are looking at annual liability of 1.6 million pa.

Seems unlikely. Contract rates are probably 1k per person per day.ou need very qualified individuals to do this work you might be looking at say 8 people at about 200k overhead each. You need this on a long duration basis (good staff won't take a 6 month contract) you are looking at annual liability of 1.6 million pa.

Seems unlikely. Contract rates are probably 1k per person per day.
How on earth did we manage before this accounting cartel arose? The Labour and TU research departments were good enough for Attlee, who set up a comprehensive system of progressive taxation.

PWC will not be offering pro-people advice to any party, they will be reinforcing the current set up because it is in their interests.

Attlee had a mass membership party, it could probably afford to pay for the staff. Modern political parties really cannot carry the overhead of professionals. The state could, it could maintain a full time team and give them to parties for political work. Until that happens your choices are accept what you are offered or go without.

Qualified capable people cost money.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:52 pm**

pk1 wrote:A poster at UKPR claims to work for News Intl - whether he does or not, I have no idea but I guess they even use tea-boys there.

Anyway, he said this today:

PRESSMAN
A meeting the other day in which it was confirmed that Boris will trail EM throughout the campaign, a sort of omnipresent bully who’s exploits will then be reported on the next day.
Something to look out for in the coming months.

A tea boy who can't even spell

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:56 pm**

TE,

I am surprised to be having to argue this point. If Miliband is against 'vested interests' and wishes to convince the public of it, he needs to drop the very same vested interests as party advisors on the most important part of public policy - taxes. Otherwise he is open to exactly the sort of criticism being dished out and who can say it isn't right?

Rejecting free offers of advice from the world of finance is what I would have thought are 'The Basics' for a party of labour.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 4:56 pm**

Pressman = twat. Think that covers everything.

Welcome to our new posters btw.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:29 pm**

Is there a video link for Ed's speech today ?

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:31 pm**

They feared nobody would go but crowds stood in the rain to pay their respects to former Welsh Guardsman Harold Morgan
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... ce-8104264

Prepare to be moved.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:32 pm**

RobertSnozers wrote:
Rebecca wrote:
ohsocynical wrote: I wonder what the right wingers will come up with next. I have visions of them feverishly digging into Labour MP's pasts in the vain hope they can come up with something --- anything.
I always wondered if that was behind the break in to Eds' office,,.But seeing as Ed is actually one of the good guys(remember his were the lowest expenses)they failed to find any dirt.
The only other option is that they're sitting on something to release with six weeks to go, but it's felt as though the kitchen sink has been thrown at Ed this week so that's less likely IMO.

Politicians are hostages to fortune, but I don't imagine that Miliband has a 'caught in flagrante with a goat' secret. By May next year, the media coverage of Miliband will make it seem as though he is the epitome of evil. And I'll be there calling them out for anti semitism.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:35 pm**

yahyah wrote:Is there a video link for Ed's speech today ?

[youtube]ZwGxxu8n2YM[/youtube]

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:36 pm**

Thanks Rebecca, I did search honestly.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:39 pm**

rebeccariots2 wrote:
pk1 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Blimey how did I miss the Esther McVey story? This is what happens when you're not on Twitter I guess.
Can you expand on that please ? What McVey story ??
Take a look at the Mail today - if you can bear to PK.
And there's this development.
McDonnellToShappsReEstherMcVeyStory.jpg
https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP

John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 1h1 hour ago
For the record, here's the letter I wrote to Tory Shapps to tell him to stop peddling untruths about me. pic.twitter.com/yh8mKRhKOD

Details
John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 7h7 hours ago
I see the Daily Mail is having a go at me. I wear any attack by the once Hitler supporting Daily Mail as a badge of honour.

I follow him on Twitter and the only conclusion I can come to is Shapps/Green/Fox is a congenital liar.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:39 pm**

yahyah wrote:Thanks Rebecca, I did search honestly.

It had just popped up in a twitter feed I was viewing ... so absolutely no sweat required on my part.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:45 pm**

mikems wrote:TE,

I am surprised to be having to argue this point. If Miliband is against 'vested interests' and wishes to convince the public of it, he needs to drop the very same vested interests as party advisors on the most important part of public policy - taxes. Otherwise he is open to exactly the sort of criticism being dished out and who can say it isn't right?

Rejecting free offers of advice from the world of finance is what I would have thought are 'The Basics' for a party of labour.

I disagree entirely.

The work needs doing, somebody has to do it and the Labour Party can't resource it. Conflicts of interest will have to be managed.

The alternative is ignorance, which is not an option given the resources ranged against them.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:48 pm**

Interesting posts on AS's blog, maybe confirms what some feel about him.

Catiline 5h ago
"Job done, I guess". Mr Sparrow was a Tory when i knew him at university and a leopard doesn't change his spots.....

PictureInTheAttic reply to Catiline 4h ago
yeah yeah. Along with everyone at the Graun, new Statesman, BBC, on twitter etc.
Tories to a man and woman I tells ya.

Catiline reply to PictureInTheAttic 3h ago
I've not met everyone you list above. my comment was made from personal experience.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:49 pm**

ohsocynical wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
pk1 wrote: Can you expand on that please ? What McVey story ??
Take a look at the Mail today - if you can bear to PK.
And there's this development.
McDonnellToShappsReEstherMcVeyStory.jpg
https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP

John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 1h1 hour ago
For the record, here's the letter I wrote to Tory Shapps to tell him to stop peddling untruths about me. pic.twitter.com/yh8mKRhKOD

Details
John McDonnell ‏@johnmcdonnellMP 7h7 hours ago
I see the Daily Mail is having a go at me. I wear any attack by the once Hitler supporting Daily Mail as a badge of honour.
I follow him on Twitter and the only conclusion I can come to is Shapps/Green/Fox is a congenital liar.

And, frankly, not a good one at that. This is yet another smear attempt that has unravelled almost immediately (I remain convinced that Wreathgate was his idea and not Lynton's, Crosby would not have been that clumsy); the fact that Cameron keeps this fool in post, despite his serial failures, speaks volumes for his lack of judgement.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:52 pm**

Number of tenants evicted hits record levels as benefit cuts bite
Figures show more than 30,000 tenants thrown out by end of September, which social landlords say is due to bedroom tax
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/n ... edroom-tax

Another group of people really badly affected by the current government who might not find it easy, or have as a priority, registering to vote in the next election ... all part of the plan?

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 5:59 pm**

mikems wrote:TE,

I am surprised to be having to argue this point. If Miliband is against 'vested interests' and wishes to convince the public of it, he needs to drop the very same vested interests as party advisors on the most important part of public policy - taxes. Otherwise he is open to exactly the sort of criticism being dished out and who can say it isn't right?

Rejecting free offers of advice from the world of finance is what I would have thought are 'The Basics' for a party of labour.

I'm inclined to agree with this.

I appreciate that TE knows more about the subject - and its costs - than I do, but there's a moral issue here. Well, for me, anyway.

Surely there must be some well-qualified people at the OBR and whatnot. There are finance and business whizzkids among MPs.

I'm willing to be educated further on this - but I'm not sure I like it.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:01 pm**

mikems wrote:TE,

I am surprised to be having to argue this point. If Miliband is against 'vested interests' and wishes to convince the public of it, he needs to drop the very same vested interests as party advisors on the most important part of public policy - taxes. Otherwise he is open to exactly the sort of criticism being dished out and who can say it isn't right?

Rejecting free offers of advice from the world of finance is what I would have thought are 'The Basics' for a party of labour.

I don't think there's anywhere else much they can get the advice from, as things stand.

It's not just on what they want to do in power, but on what the government might do now, and what the next moves should be after that. I'd much rather they paid for it, but the Short Money doesn't seem to cover it. Partner-level advice would be something like £700 an hour.

The Opposition need to be given access to something like the OBR but for tax.

The worry is that PWC and KPMG get all this free insight to what a future government might do, but are ready with products to sell to their clients when they do. Having two firms is certainly better than one. But it's certainly a worry.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:01 pm**

Oh no, ANOTHER list of dumb oligarch & boneheaded billionaires spending £50k eat with Cameron. Why not just flush it straight down the bog?

Bet Dave's table manners are rubbish too, and his small talk must be arse-clenchingly awful. These people need their money confiscated, Ed!

Love Martin Rowson.

Sorry, don't know how to embed a tweet.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:03 pm**

ephemerid wrote:More fun on Universal Credit.

DWP has decided to cut payments to claimants if they get into arrears thus -
If someone on UC has problems paying their landlords directly, DWP can arrange to have the housing element of UC paid direct to the landlord.
Until now, if the person was in arrears with their rent, DWP guidance said that 5% of the remaining UC after rent could be diverted before the claimant gets it and sent directly to the landlord to "help" the claimant reduce their arrears.
Now, they have decided that they will take between 10% and 20% of the remainder of the UC - this, apparently, is to ensure that claimants get "back on track" with their rent arrears faster. The claimant, obviously, has no choice.

So - what next? What if they don't like the look of what the claimants' bank statements say about how they spend their UC? Will they "ensure" they only spend it on the correct things? What if someone spends a fiver on the bingo?

FFS.

I thought they were going to pay all the rent in the case of arrears. Wasn't it in the Portes or Channel 4 programme?

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:03 pm**

gilsey wrote:
Oh no, ANOTHER list of dumb oligarch & boneheaded billionaires spending £50k eat with Cameron. Why not just flush it straight down the bog?

Bet Dave's table manners are rubbish too, and his small talk must be arse-clenchingly awful. These people need their money confiscated, Ed!
Love Martin Rowson.

Sorry, don't know how to embed a tweet.

He tells such obvious outragous lies it's beyond belief. I'm reminded of a puppet loaded up with propaganda and all you do is pull the string. You would think he would check what he's supposed to be saying and God forbid make it sound less false even if it was for his own credibility, but even that seems to be beyond him.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:05 pm**

Was a little underwhelemed by Ed's conference speech but today's - content and delivery was excellent.

What I love about him, and admire, is his fight and resilience and he's shown that in spades today.

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:08 pm**

TORY CHAIR SHAPPS FLOUNDERING OVER NEW ‘MICHAEL GREEN’ CLAIMS
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2014/11/g ... en-claims/

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:09 pm**

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Number of tenants evicted hits record levels as benefit cuts bite
Figures show more than 30,000 tenants thrown out by end of September, which social landlords say is due to bedroom tax
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/n ... edroom-tax
Another group of people really badly affected by the current government who might not find it easy, or have as a priority, registering to vote in the next election ... all part of the plan?

Oh yes!

Posted: **Thu 13 Nov, 2014 6:10 pm**

https://www.facebook.com/edmiliband

I'm here, live, to answer your questions for the next hour or so. Leave a question in the comments below and I'll try to answer as many of them as possible in the next 60 minutes.

FlyTheNest

Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014

Re: Thursday 13th November 2014