Monday 9th May 2016

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 7:53 pm

I have only been a candidate once,I didn't know I was standing until the day.I never stayed to find out how many didn't vote for me in my inevitable last place,nobody knew who I was;I had only a vague recollection.It was a representative board which never met.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:02 pm

Scottish voters sent Labour a clear message on Thursday. It's time we started to listen to what they are saying.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:06 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:So it seems to have had no effect at all ...

Adam Boulton Retweeted
George Eaton ‏@georgeeaton 5m5 minutes ago
Shadow minister tells me Corbyn offered a "GCSE analysis of election results".
I'm with you PfY re George Eaton now.

His Tweets have been getting increasingly snidey.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:08 pm

I presume some people have got an invitation to a "State of The Economy" conference at Imperial College on the 21st May.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,,-,-------
NEDerbyshire Labour Motion on fracking.

At an All Member Meeting held on 16 April a comprehensive motion on gas and oil extraction using hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, was unanimously passed. The policy as now been submitted to Derbyshire County Council as a new minerals policy is developed. Here is what it says:

"This Constituency Labour Party opposes Fracking (i.e. a method used to extract natural gas from shale rock formations), in the areas we cover. We also disagree with the availability of 132 new oil and gas exploration licences covering 5000 square miles provided by the Government, which includes our areas. We oppose fracking for the following reasons; the majority of these being safety related,
Groundwater quality – contamination with fracking chemicals and mobilisation of deep naturally occurring radioactive materials.
Waste – contamination of hydraulic fracturing i.e. drill cuttings, waste drilling muds (oil & water), waste gases e.g. Carbon Dioxide and disposal of waste water is problematic.
Water supplies – fracking requires considering amounts of water and could pose risk to local supplies if catchments were over-abstracted.
Air emissions and health – possible methane and nitrogen oxides released into the atmosphere during recovery of shale gas.
Habitats and biodiversity – loss of local habitats through; noise & vibration, air & water and truck movements all have an impact on wildlife.
Geological integrity – possible earth quakes re Cuadrilla drilling near Blackpool were halted due to two earth tremors linked to their activities.
Noise and disruption – will cause visual intrusion, loss of land and noise and vibration due to 24 hour workings.
Former workings – old mines in the area could collapse. There were several open cast planning applications rejected e.g. Apperknowle and Calow.
We ask the Derbyshire County Council planning department to report on the above, including the licences granted and possible applications. We also ask our MP Natascha Engel to update the CLP on whether the Secretary of State for State for Energy & Climate Change has more information on this matter.
We note that action is required before fracking planning applications are received, so that the case for rejecting such applications is clearly understood."

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:10 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:I'm glad Corbyn has told the PLP that members expect them to take on the Tories not each other and to stop parading in the media and providing a running commentary.

Going to be interesting to see if those responsible take it on board and adjust their behaviour or not.

I think I told you how surprised I was at a CLP meeting a few months back when a member stood up and asked the secretary to send a letter to the PLP asking them to stop all the public bickering and start focussing on the Tories. She got pretty unanimous support.

I wonder how many letters in the same vein get sent to the PLP? Must be more than one or two.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:29 pm

HindleA wrote:I presume some people have got an invitation to a "State of The Economy" conference at Imperial College on the 21st May.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,,-,-------
NEDerbyshire Labour Motion on fracking.

At an All Member Meeting held on 16 April a comprehensive motion on gas and oil extraction using hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, was unanimously passed. The policy as now been submitted to Derbyshire County Council as a new minerals policy is developed. Here is what it says:

"This Constituency Labour Party opposes Fracking (i.e. a method used to extract natural gas from shale rock formations), in the areas we cover. We also disagree with the availability of 132 new oil and gas exploration licences covering 5000 square miles provided by the Government, which includes our areas. We oppose fracking for the following reasons; the majority of these being safety related,
Groundwater quality – contamination with fracking chemicals and mobilisation of deep naturally occurring radioactive materials.
Waste – contamination of hydraulic fracturing i.e. drill cuttings, waste drilling muds (oil & water), waste gases e.g. Carbon Dioxide and disposal of waste water is problematic.
Water supplies – fracking requires considering amounts of water and could pose risk to local supplies if catchments were over-abstracted.
Air emissions and health – possible methane and nitrogen oxides released into the atmosphere during recovery of shale gas.
Habitats and biodiversity – loss of local habitats through; noise & vibration, air & water and truck movements all have an impact on wildlife.
Geological integrity – possible earth quakes re Cuadrilla drilling near Blackpool were halted due to two earth tremors linked to their activities.
Noise and disruption – will cause visual intrusion, loss of land and noise and vibration due to 24 hour workings.
Former workings – old mines in the area could collapse. There were several open cast planning applications rejected e.g. Apperknowle and Calow.
We ask the Derbyshire County Council planning department to report on the above, including the licences granted and possible applications. We also ask our MP Natascha Engel to update the CLP on whether the Secretary of State for State for Energy & Climate Change has more information on this matter.
We note that action is required before fracking planning applications are received, so that the case for rejecting such applications is clearly understood."

Good - thank you for this post

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:31 pm

Kudos to Channel 4 /News for No Go Britain.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:36 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:I'm glad Corbyn has told the PLP that members expect them to take on the Tories not each other and to stop parading in the media and providing a running commentary.

Going to be interesting to see if those responsible take it on board and adjust their behaviour or not.

I think I told you how surprised I was at a CLP meeting a few months back when a member stood up and asked the secretary to send a letter to the PLP asking them to stop all the public bickering and start focussing on the Tories. She got pretty unanimous support.
I wonder how many letters in the same vein get sent to the PLP? Must be more than one or two.

I find it dismaying, it feels gutting and like the ground giving way beneath my feet reading or hearing rude, immature
snipes from Labour leadership to another Labour person. No, we don't all think alike. I don't speak for every Labour person.
I don't expect anything other than responsible behaviour. It's a job. Use professional conduct in all dealings as an elected
Labour party person. Party politics is a vehicle used getting elected into leadership as public servants representing all the
people. It's not religion, it's not a cult, it's not business. It's social organisation - public service.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:42 pm

On Twitter, conflicting accounts of the number of seats Labour lost. Someone has just posted 11, the Independent had 18?

I'm getting confused.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:45 pm

https://offshoreleaks.icij.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:48 pm

Ruth Cadbury MP ‏@RuthCadbury 4m4 minutes ago
"If ever a test was set up to prepare children to fail, this was it" Teacher - Daily Mail http://dailym.ai/1Yi55jL" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; via @MailOnline

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:49 pm

The Norfolk Greens abstention giving the Tories overall control seems to have upset quite a few on social media. Is there anyway back from this ... anyone who might know?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:55 pm

Jeremy Corbyn MP ‏@jeremycorbyn 3h3 hours ago

Plenty to discuss w/@SadiqKhan about getting London back on track after 8 yrs of Tory failure on housing & transport

I don't expect we'll read about this in the papers either.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:57 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
Jeremy Corbyn MP ‏@jeremycorbyn 3h3 hours ago

Plenty to discuss w/@SadiqKhan about getting London back on track after 8 yrs of Tory failure on housing & transport
I don't expect we'll read about this in the papers either.

I'm happy to read about this, Ohso.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 8:58 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:The Norfolk Greens abstention giving the Tories overall control seems to have upset quite a few on social media. Is there anyway back from this ... anyone who might know?

Difficult if it's personality rather than party.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:04 pm

Destruction of Social Housing Bill back in the Commons again-definately "pong" stage.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:07 pm

Kevin Courtney (NUT) ‏@cyclingkev 25m25 minutes ago

"Taught Y6 for 15 years & never seen an entire class completely defeated by the reading test like I did today." @LucyMPowell @NickyMorgan01

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:27 pm

ohsocynical wrote:On Twitter, conflicting accounts of the number of seats Labour lost. Someone has just posted 11, the Independent had 18?

I'm getting confused.

It's getting past the time of day when I can pull together my resource sheets - part of the problem is the formatting news organisations have used to display results

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/councils" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016 ... rn_ireland" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/scotland" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/wales" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/london" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

40 total PCC elections
Tory total = 20 PCCs
Labour total = 15 PCCs
Plaid Cymru = 2 PCCs
Independents = 3 PCCs

Labour took 3 PCC from Tories
Cheshire
Humberside
Leicestershire

Labour took 1 PCC from Independents
Gwent

Tories took 1 PCC from Labour
Bedfordshire

Tories took 7 PCC from Independents
Hampshire
Kent
Lincolnshire
Norfolk
Surrey
Warwickshire
West Mercia

Plaid Cymru took 1 PCC from Tories
Dyfed-Powys

Plaid Cymru took 1 PCC from Independents
North Wales

Independents = 3 PCCs
Gloucestershire
Dorset
Avon and Somerset

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/police" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Please check my work if anyone has time or inclination
I did my best

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:33 pm

English council seat election results are linked above and also
Welsh Assembly
Northern Ireland Assembly
Scottish Parliament
London Assembly
London Mayoral Election
Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC)

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:34 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Kevin Courtney (NUT) ‏@cyclingkev 25m25 minutes ago

"Taught Y6 for 15 years & never seen an entire class completely defeated by the reading test like I did today." @LucyMPowell @NickyMorgan01

Just had an email back from our HT who said much the same thing as everyone else has been saying.

Also, general feeling is that it's nowhere even close to being comparable to the sample paper published last summer.

They're not going to calculate what 100 (meeting expectation) means in terms of marks until they've had all results in so we'll never know whether it simply was far too difficult. If you've got good, confident readers not able to finish, what does that say about the paper?

Post by **refitman** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:50 pm

Happy Birthday howsillyofme.

Post by **refitman** » Mon 09 May, 2016 9:54 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Rochdale Online ‏@RochdaleOnline 59m59 minutes ago
“Karen Danczuk should face disciplinary action” says Heywood and Middleton MP Liz McInnes http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-fe ... iz-mcinnes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

At least Rochdale Online get the name of the constituency correct, which is more than can be said for the lovely Kaz: http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2016/ ... ng-mp.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:08 pm

tom bradby ‏@tombradby 1h1 hour ago
I have watched an awful lot of David Cameron speeches over the years, but today's effort profoundly baffled me.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:11 pm

Michael Rosen ‏@MichaelRosenYes 2h2 hours ago
Have written to Nicky Morgan to demand that next year's KS 2 SPaG/GPS includes gerunds. We must stay globally competitive.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:13 pm

Monday, 9 May 2016

Today's Reading Comprehension Test - important press release
"For our Reading comprehension test today, we at Top Standards in Examining Everyone All the Time, have ensured that only really feeble, dull, poorly written passages were put in front of children, ideally on subjects that interest very, very, very few children. We tried to ask them the kinds of questions that they themselves would never ask, and tried to narrow these down to ones that only have right and wrong answers. This removed any possibility that the children got the impression that writing and reading are about interesting nuances of meaning, some of which change and shift in a book. We were also on the look out for passages where children of a particular kind of background brought their knowledge to bear on the passage so that really we were testing their parents' level of education, not the children's. Ultimately, we hope that these tests will ensure that a school which is not an academy becomes one. Good night. "

http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.co.uk/ ... l?spref=tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:13 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:Kevin Courtney (NUT) ‏@cyclingkev 25m25 minutes ago

"Taught Y6 for 15 years & never seen an entire class completely defeated by the reading test like I did today." @LucyMPowell @NickyMorgan01
Just had an email back from our HT who said much the same thing as everyone else has been saying.

Also, general feeling is that it's nowhere even close to being comparable to the sample paper published last summer.

They're not going to calculate what 100 (meeting expectation) means in terms of marks until they've had all results in so we'll never know whether it simply was far too difficult. If you've got good, confident readers not able to finish, what does that say about the paper?

Our eldest is going through this.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:33 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:Kevin Courtney (NUT) ‏@cyclingkev 25m25 minutes ago

"Taught Y6 for 15 years & never seen an entire class completely defeated by the reading test like I did today." @LucyMPowell @NickyMorgan01
Just had an email back from our HT who said much the same thing as everyone else has been saying.

Also, general feeling is that it's nowhere even close to being comparable to the sample paper published last summer.

They're not going to calculate what 100 (meeting expectation) means in terms of marks until they've had all results in so we'll never know whether it simply was far too difficult. If you've got good, confident readers not able to finish, what does that say about the paper?
Our eldest is going through this.

My dear StephenDolan - please give my love to your family and know you're in my thoughts, wishing the best for all.
I'm sorry I can't do more to assist my friends.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:37 pm

goodnight, everyone
love,
cJA

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 09 May, 2016 10:53 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:Kevin Courtney (NUT) ‏@cyclingkev 25m25 minutes ago

"Taught Y6 for 15 years & never seen an entire class completely defeated by the reading test like I did today." @LucyMPowell @NickyMorgan01
Just had an email back from our HT who said much the same thing as everyone else has been saying.

Also, general feeling is that it's nowhere even close to being comparable to the sample paper published last summer.

They're not going to calculate what 100 (meeting expectation) means in terms of marks until they've had all results in so we'll never know whether it simply was far too difficult. If you've got good, confident readers not able to finish, what does that say about the paper?
Our eldest is going through this.

Sorry to hear that. Year 2 and year 6 sound hellish this year. If year 6's do badly, the targets set in year 7 will be easier and secondaries (mostly academies these days) will potentially look better on 'progress', won't they? It's all so disruptive and unnecessary. I hope schools boycott sats again until the DofE stops acting like jerkwads.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:05 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Scottish voters sent Labour a clear message on Thursday. It's time we started to listen to what they are saying.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I wish Labour would send a clear message to Scottish voters. Here we have the deputy leader apparently advocating "home rule", whatever that entails. To me it looks like creeping independence. If the LP want to be SNP-lite, fine - but it won't win my vote!

LABOUR should have campaigned on a platform of home rule for Scotland in the Holyrood election instead of being “illogical” and attempting to move the debate on from the constitution, the party’s deputy leader has said.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/alex-rowle ... -1-4123109

When Tom Watson was interviewed on R4 on Friday morning, the interviewer made the point that the LP membership can't win an election - they need the wider electorate on side first. I really hate to say this, but the Tories are the only 100% pro-union party in Scotland at present - and 55% of the Scottish voted pro-union last year.

There is also the little problem that constitutional matters are reserved to Westminster.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:08 pm

http://www.nber.org/papers/w22213?utm_c ... source=ntw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Using a combination of subsidized premiums for Marketplace coverage, an individual mandate, and expanded Medicaid eligibility, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has significantly increased insurance coverage rates.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:17 pm

Thanks for link also found
The Effect of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansions on Financial Well-Being
Our estimates imply a reduction in collection balances of around $600 to $1,000 among those who gain Medicaid coverage due to the ACA. Our findings suggest that the ACA Medicaid expansions had important financial impacts beyond health care use.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w22170" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:34 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:http://www.nber.org/papers/w22213?utm_c ... source=ntw

Using a combination of subsidized premiums for Marketplace coverage, an individual mandate, and expanded Medicaid eligibility, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has significantly increased insurance coverage rates.
Interesting. I know some usually sensible Americans who were pretty down on the ACA, having heard that it had caused people to lose jobs where their employer couldn't afford to pay their expected share and things like that. Going from the experience of the minimum wage, where lots of similar arguments were made, I'm sceptical that the impact would be as bad as feared, but I'd be interested to see if there are any studies on the overall impact.

Obama's statement that existing care plans would remain caused a lot of trouble. Lots of them didn't.

It says that it went better where states (ie ones with Democrat governors) set up exchanges of their own. Not a bad issue for November, even if the appalling turnouts for other elections means the Republicans win them.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 09 May, 2016 11:35 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/09/opini ... p=cur&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The making of an ignoramus" Paul Krugman

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Tue 10 May, 2016 12:01 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:Scottish voters sent Labour a clear message on Thursday. It's time we started to listen to what they are saying.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I wish Labour would send a clear message to Scottish voters. Here we have the deputy leader apparently advocating "home rule", whatever that entails. To me it looks like creeping independence. If the LP want to be SNP-lite, fine - but it won't win my vote!
LABOUR should have campaigned on a platform of home rule for Scotland in the Holyrood election instead of being “illogical” and attempting to move the debate on from the constitution, the party’s deputy leader has said.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/alex-rowle ... -1-4123109
When Tom Watson was interviewed on R4 on Friday morning, the interviewer made the point that the LP membership can't win an election - they need the wider electorate on side first. I really hate to say this, but the Tories are the only 100% pro-union party in Scotland at present - and 55% of the Scottish voted pro-union last year.

There is also the little problem that constitutional matters are reserved to Westminster.
I think Labour made a tactical error here in seeming apologetic for its pro-Union stance in the Indyref and allowing itself to listen to the louder voices but not the majority voice. As a result it made itself unattractive to leftwing unionist voters and remained every bit as unappealing to Nats. My guess is that there aren't many waverers in Scotland at the moment, so why hedge? The problem is now that it would be hard to go back to a resolutely unionist position without looking like they are trying to ape the Tories. Which is never a good look.

Another thing that Labour ought to be doing in Scotland is promising to be a powerful advocate and voice for Scotland at Westminster. The sense I got was that people felt Labour expected Scotland's votes but didn't want to do anything to earn it, and that the SNP would fight Scotland's corner. I have to say I had hoped that many of the votes for the SNP were cast in the expectation of a Labour-SNP coalition, and that voters would return to Labour in horror at the Tory government. I think it's fair to say that's not going to happen.

I agree that the SLP have a problem in supporting the union while not being seen to support the Tories.
The trouble is that Scotland can vote to either leave or stay in the "club" that is the union. What we can't do is vote to change the rules of the club - that is a matter for all four members.
In putting forward home rule, devo-max or whatever, the SLP would be pushing for something they can't deliver, which ultimately won't endear them to supporters of their proposal. There is also the question of whether the referendum 'no' voters actually want more change or the status quo.
The SNP and the Tories support the black or white position - in or out of the union. The SLP and SLDs seem to be supporting a position which is outwith their remit and must be endorsed (or not) at national (UK) level.

Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016

Re: Monday 9th May 2016