Tuesday 24th November 2015

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 9:35 pm

The United States of America has some good people, institutions and accomplishments I'm able to appreciate. I regret the USA has thus far failed to achieve what a Labour government helped create in the UK. The US lacks what a Labour party government helped build in the UK, a civilisation worthy of everyone, for everyone within it. The UK made it happen, the people made it happen. It doesn't have to be over.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 9:38 pm

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/11/ ... -bus-lanes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Zac's said he'd allow electric cars into bus lanes in the short term. Got a right kicking. Bus passengers don't really figure to him or Johnson.

Post by **refitman** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 9:46 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/11/ ... -bus-lanes

Zac's said he'd allow electric cars into bus lanes in the short term. Got a right kicking. Bus passengers don't really figure to him or Johnson.

Goldsmith told LBC's Nick Ferrari, that the rise of electric cars means that there will soon be "no point" in having bus lanes.

How the hell does that actually work?? Isn't the point of bus lanes to make traffic management easier and allow buses to stop and pick up passengers without blocking traffic? I thought Goldsmith was one of the 'sensible' Tories.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 9:48 pm

ChairWarksPolFed ‏@ChairWarkPolFed 20 mins20 minutes ago

At 1230 hrs 25th November 2015 The Thin Blue Line will be breached. Very sad for those that want to protect. We tried, but they didn't listen

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 9:55 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
trident.png
These are the Labour rebels who defied Corbyn and voted to keep Trident:

I don't mind they voted this way...But I do find women on the list disappointing. I think my age is showing.

Not as many as some predicted - and a mix of the obviously self-interested (I don't mean Woodcock and my own MP any disrespect in that) and 4.5%-er ideologues.

Small earthquake in Chile, not many dead category.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 9:57 pm

refitman wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/11/ ... -bus-lanes

Zac's said he'd allow electric cars into bus lanes in the short term. Got a right kicking. Bus passengers don't really figure to him or Johnson.

Goldsmith told LBC's Nick Ferrari, that the rise of electric cars means that there will soon be "no point" in having bus lanes.
How the hell does that actually work?? Isn't the point of bus lanes to make traffic management easier and allow buses to stop and pick up passengers without blocking traffic? I thought Goldsmith was one of the 'sensible' Tories.

The only explanation is that the doesn't care much for bus passengers, whereas electric cars are something he can imagine people buying.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:00 pm

Everybody will be driving electric cars in 2-3 years time?Not my area of knowledge(what is?)but that is bollox isn't it?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:01 pm

Jim Pickard ‏@PickardJE 3 mins3 minutes ago

Hearing rumour that apprentice levy will be charged at 0.3 per cent of payroll on all companies with £1m-plus turnover.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:02 pm

Bollocks especially in London.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:03 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Jim Pickard ‏@PickardJE 3 mins3 minutes ago

Hearing rumour that apprentice levy will be charged at 0.3 per cent of payroll on all companies with £1m-plus turnover.

Joined up government, what with the corporation tax cuts he's been handing out.

Anyway, glad he's keeping it simple and not adding more pages to the tax manual like that Gordo did.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:04 pm

APPRENTICE TAX

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:10 pm

HindleA wrote:Life is a compromise,whether we like it or not.I recognise the agonising contemplation of such compromising,I have done it for 35 years,belonging to a party,that at times I have fundamentally disagreed with in certain areas of policy I don't think I have sold my principles by doing so,rather acknowledged that most people do not share my view on some things and probably never will,even in the same party,never mind the general public and what option/choice do I have beyond ploughing my furrow.That is why I asked as to how leaving the only party,perhaps in coalition,that can replace,in my eyes,an inceasingly fascistic regime,"helps"

You've used fewer words describing what I wanted to communicate earlier.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:55 pm

Good-night, everyone.
love,
cJA

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:58 pm

This is quite amusing, for reasons I cannot elaborate on.

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/n ... s-gas-pipe

Infrastructure, of all the places to put a music festival.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 10:59 pm

Tube extension in affluent South West Hertfordshire has funding.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/news ... greed.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The £284·4m cost includes a local contribution of £125·4m, £109·8m from the Department for Transport and £49·2m from Transport for London. The local funding includes £87·9m from the Hertfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership, which represents 40% of its total Growth Deal funding from the government.

That's a lot of central government funding there. It looks quite a neat project, tying up some loose ends very well, but do they not see how this looks to people outside London? Actually, add lots of people in London to that. A fair few extra buses could run with that TfL grant.

Hard to disentangle what's raised locally and what isn't, but I wouldn't have thought it unreasonable the people of this area to have had a bit put on their council tax for it. Maybe they have, I don't know.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:00 pm

"Savings" from housing benefit changes well less than a billion,apparently.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:04 pm

Actually that project is 2 years late, in fairness.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:05 pm

HindleA wrote:"Savings" from housing benefit changes well less than a billion,apparently.

Interesting.

Some slippage in the £10bn surplus target then.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:14 pm

As ever I'll read the details and what he doesn't state later,he has a habit of little spiteful targetted changes(not little to the targetted of course).

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:17 pm

HindleA wrote:As ever I'll read the details and what he doesn't state later,he has a habit of little spiteful targetted changes(not little to the targetted of course).

Yes, the devil will be in the detail...it's what he doesn't say on the day that will be most important.

I'll be interested to see the analysis of the growth numbers and see whether we're still relying on household spending to carry the economy along.

The FT is leading on 400,000 new houses but I don't think it says over what time period.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:20 pm

Wonder if the target for tax avoidance has been raised.

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:20 pm

Willow904 wrote:The party made a mistake by not going for Burnham or Cooper in the first place. The Tories avoid such mistakes by only giving members a choice between contenders they actually want. Ed gave the MPs this ability, which they stupidly stuffed up, so the blame lies with the PLP, but that's small comfort for those of us facing over a decade of right-wing crap.

Andy Burnham, the far-left winger best known as the Stafford NHS murderer? "Tax and Spend" Andy Burnham, who would throw wasted billions after wasted billions at the NHS to ensure the staff all vote Labour while patients starve to death?

Who despite flip-flopping on all kinds of issues is really both a commited hard-line Bolshevik who can't even make his mind up what he wants and a wishy-washy weakling who'll follow whoever shouts loudest and do whatever he thinks best for his career?

That Andy Burnham?

Or Yvette "Mrs Ed Tax and Spend Balls" Cooper? Really? A house-flipping hard-leftist high-taxing man-hater who would have taken away our civil liberties by forcing Stasi ID cards and mass surveillance on everyone? Someone who doesn't even use her real surname but tries to hide who she's married to? Who would do whatever her husband tells her (despite her feminazism) - a husband who the electorate so decisively chucked out after he helped Brown destroy the world's economy? Who wants to sap our precious bodily fluids by diluting them with immigrants?

Give me the name of any other potential leader and I'll suggest how to run a campaign to ensure they aren't seen as "electable" either. All I have to do is look at how previous Labour leaders were treated.

Labour's "problem" can be addressed in two ways. One is finding a leader who is acceptable to Rupert Murdoch, Lord Rothermere, the Barclay Brothers, the Centre for Policy Studies and the Taxpayer's Alliance. Then that leader might not get a new slur thrown at them every 20 minutes while what they actually said is not reported or quote-mined and turned into something quite different. So long as the Tories happen to be in a state of collapse at the time, of course.

A strategy which has been going on since Keir Hardie was traduced for his willingness to let Great Britain and the Empire be over-run by the Kaiser's Hunnish Hordes.

The other way of addressing the problem is finding a way to overcome the well-funded concerted efforts to undermine, defame and smear whoever happens to be Labour's leader just because they are Labour's leader.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:24 pm

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/poli ... ising.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are ‘emerging risks’ to achieving value for money, the National Audit Office warns in its report on the Department for Transport’s management of the passenger rail franchising programme which was published on November 24. These include uncertainty around infrastructure projects, a reduction in market interest and ‘stretched’ resources at bidders and DfT itself.

DfT getting a lot more running cost cuts.

Joined up government.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:26 pm

TR'sGhost wrote:
Willow904 wrote:The party made a mistake by not going for Burnham or Cooper in the first place. The Tories avoid such mistakes by only giving members a choice between contenders they actually want. Ed gave the MPs this ability, which they stupidly stuffed up, so the blame lies with the PLP, but that's small comfort for those of us facing over a decade of right-wing crap.
Andy Burnham, the far-left winger best known as the Stafford NHS murderer? "Tax and Spend" Andy Burnham, who would throw wasted billions after wasted billions at the NHS to ensure the staff all vote Labour while patients starve to death?

He was Shadow Health Secretary before. The Tories didn't go for him at all at the election.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:29 pm

Oops.

Grant Shapps was personally warned about three cases of bullying by Mark Clarke a year ago - and did nothing

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... thing.html

Grant Shapps was personally warned by a senior Conservative MP about three cases of alleged bullying by the “Tatler Tory” Mark Clarke a year ago – but indicated he would do nothing about it, according to a former Tory minister.

Mr Shapps, who is now a junior minister but at the time was Conservative party co-chairman, was warned by a former Tory minister that Mr Clarke had bullied three young people.

The senior Tory MP warned Mr Shapps at the Conservative party conference in October 2014 and shortly afterwards when MPs returned to Parliament.

However, the MP says that Mr Shapps indicated to him that he was not prepared to do anything about it.

What did I say the other night? The worst thing you can do is to ignore it and hope it goes away.

Shapps has only himself to blame for this.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:29 pm

That rail link is 4 years late. I beg your pardon.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:30 pm

http://news.sky.com/story/1593729/spend ... ach-likely" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spending Review: Welfare Cap Breach Likely
Sky News understands Whitehall is making plans for a Commons vote on George Osborne's welfare cap within a month.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:32 pm

HindleA wrote:http://news.sky.com/story/1593729/spend ... ach-likely

Spending Review: Welfare Cap Breach Likely
Sky News understands Whitehall is making plans for a Commons vote on George Osborne's welfare cap within a month.

Breached his own cap - how embarrassing.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:36 pm

"It wasn't me, I was signing autographs", says Grant Shapps.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:37 pm

HindleA wrote:http://news.sky.com/story/1593729/spend ... ach-likely

Spending Review: Welfare Cap Breach Likely
Sky News understands Whitehall is making plans for a Commons vote on George Osborne's welfare cap within a month.

Excellent. Chuck the whole thing out.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:40 pm

I hope LadyC is all right...

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:44 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
HindleA wrote:http://news.sky.com/story/1593729/spend ... ach-likely

Spending Review: Welfare Cap Breach Likely
Sky News understands Whitehall is making plans for a Commons vote on George Osborne's welfare cap within a month.
Breached his own cap - how embarrassing.

The policy was designed as a trap for Labour, but the Chancellor would appear to have been caught in it himself.

"It'll be breached ... he's not going to get it for next year," said one Westminster source.

In the event of a breach, the Government is obliged to hold a vote in the House of Commons within 28 days.

Such a vote is required if the cap is exceeded for policy reasons, or if there is a change in the definition of which benefits contribute to the cap.

I am so bloody glad that Labour came to its senses and voted against the fiscal charter ... that surplus pledge is going to come back and bite Osborne on the bum too. He thinks he's so clever ... all these not so cunning stunts ... hope they'll be his downfall.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:46 pm

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

Tory activists believe names leaked after complaints against Mark Clarke

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:48 pm

Hands up who knows what benefits/allowances are included in the cap,no peeking now.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:49 pm

All of them that go to working age people!

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:49 pm

So seeing tweets saying that Osborne is going to climbdown over tax credits tomorrow - will phase them in once so called 'Living Wage' has come in - and is cutting more from housing benefit.

And Cameron has apparently already caved on the demand for no in work benefits to be paid to migrants until they've been here for 4 years.

U turns almost a daily occurrence now. Expect the court charges to be scrapped soon.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:50 pm

TR'sGhost wrote:
Willow904 wrote:The party made a mistake by not going for Burnham or Cooper in the first place. The Tories avoid such mistakes by only giving members a choice between contenders they actually want. Ed gave the MPs this ability, which they stupidly stuffed up, so the blame lies with the PLP, but that's small comfort for those of us facing over a decade of right-wing crap.
Andy Burnham, the far-left winger best known as the Stafford NHS murderer? "Tax and Spend" Andy Burnham, who would throw wasted billions after wasted billions at the NHS to ensure the staff all vote Labour while patients starve to death?

Who despite flip-flopping on all kinds of issues is really both a commited hard-line Bolshevik who can't even make his mind up what he wants and a wishy-washy weakling who'll follow whoever shouts loudest and do whatever he thinks best for his career?

That Andy Burnham?

Or Yvette "Mrs Ed Tax and Spend Balls" Cooper? Really? A house-flipping hard-leftist high-taxing man-hater who would have taken away our civil liberties by forcing Stasi ID cards and mass surveillance on everyone? Someone who doesn't even use her real surname but tries to hide who she's married to? Who would do whatever her husband tells her (despite her feminazism) - a husband who the electorate so decisively chucked out after he helped Brown destroy the world's economy? Who wants to sap our precious bodily fluids by diluting them with immigrants?

Give me the name of any other potential leader and I'll suggest how to run a campaign to ensure they aren't seen as "electable" either. All I have to do is look at how previous Labour leaders were treated.

Labour's "problem" can be addressed in two ways. One is finding a leader who is acceptable to Rupert Murdoch, Lord Rothermere, the Barclay Brothers, the Centre for Policy Studies and the Taxpayer's Alliance. Then that leader might not get a new slur thrown at them every 20 minutes while what they actually said is not reported or quote-mined and turned into something quite different. So long as the Tories happen to be in a state of collapse at the time, of course.

A strategy which has been going on since Keir Hardie was traduced for his willingness to let Great Britain and the Empire be over-run by the Kaiser's Hunnish Hordes.

The other way of addressing the problem is finding a way to overcome the well-funded concerted efforts to undermine, defame and smear whoever happens to be Labour's leader just because they are Labour's leader.

Every Labour leader will get hammered, Blair got it, Kinnock got it and Miliband got it.

However that does not mean that the right leader in the right circumstances cannot win. Despite everything Miliband and Kinnock were competitive. But you have to at least try and find common ground with the electorate, you have to try and unify your party and you have to be trusted on defence and the economy and at least competitive as a PM.

None of this will help if you hit impossible circumstances but governments do screw up, and a non threatening alternative offering a brighter alternative can win. But for Scotland Miliband probably would have been PM.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:52 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
HindleA wrote:http://news.sky.com/story/1593729/spend ... ach-likely

Spending Review: Welfare Cap Breach Likely
Sky News understands Whitehall is making plans for a Commons vote on George Osborne's welfare cap within a month.
Breached his own cap - how embarrassing.

The policy was designed as a trap for Labour, but the Chancellor would appear to have been caught in it himself.

"It'll be breached ... he's not going to get it for next year," said one Westminster source.

In the event of a breach, the Government is obliged to hold a vote in the House of Commons within 28 days.

Such a vote is required if the cap is exceeded for policy reasons, or if there is a change in the definition of which benefits contribute to the cap.
I am so bloody glad that Labour came to its senses and voted against the fiscal charter ... that surplus pledge is going to come back and bite Osborne on the bum too. He thinks he's so clever ... all these not so cunning stunts ... hope they'll be his downfall.

I didn't get the point of the fiscal charter post election. Nobody cares if he breaches it or not.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:56 pm

Surprised to see fair bit more NHS spending.

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

This must be the surplus virtually gone, surely? It was only £10bn.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 24 Nov, 2015 11:57 pm

TSK good grief,he hasn't caved in.He is the listening Chancellor and that is a strength.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:04 am

If these leaks are reliable, they won't help his standing in the Tory Party. Lots of MPs have been made to defend tax credit cuts, NHS funding problems etc.

Turns out now they needn't have bothered.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:05 am

Guardian states "Axe to fall on police and care"

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:12 am

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... -statement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:14 am

Osborne will also press ahead with plans trailed in the Conservative manifesto for 200,000 new starter homes to help first-time buyers under the age of 40 purchase a home at a 20% discount. The Treasury will directly fund developers to build starter homes and fund the regeneration of brownfield land for their construction.

Marxist Corbyn!

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:16 am

What is that crap about Labour's decade of expansion of the State,I believe it was bigger under Major?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:24 am

HindleA wrote:What is that crap about Labour's decade of expansion of the State,I believe it was bigger under Major?

Public spending as % GDP

1979-97..........42.0%

of which

1990-97..........39.8%

1997-2010.......39.1%

So yes, you're correct.

We're currently at 39.6% for this year which historically is not high at all.

To hear the loons whining about it, you'd think it was above 50%.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:30 am

I shouldn't really because it'll hurt us too but...LOL.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:31 am

To be fair, it was low by the end of Major's period. Assuming that was about where he saw it should be, then there was a few percentage points between him and the level under an established Blair/Brown government. Quite rightly.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 12:51 am

That Sarah Wollaston article looks interesting...except that you get an error when you click on it.

Embargoed until the morning...or pulled as too inconvenient?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Nov, 2015 1:13 am

I know I keep repeating myself.Actively,reducing and removing income which facillitates the accounting for sickness/disabilty -including benefits/allowances as an integral and crucial part of-in one's home,is an epic false economy,even ignoring misanthropic intentions.By ignoring this,the crisis cannot begin to be addressed.We were lucky,such accounting sensibly addressed,both in financial and human terms.This could be the case for all,if only the blinkers were removed.