Wednesday, 24th August, 2016

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 11:55 am

JonnyT1234 wrote:
PorFavor wrote:Is Jeremy Corbyn sitting on the floor of a Virgin train the only "important" thing that's happening in the (Guardian) world of politics and UK news? And I don't even support the man.
Fear not. Something much more important has turned up:

"Live updates as Will and Kate visit Luton in first appearance for a month - Mirror Online"

I'll spare you an URL.

You don't go out for months and, when you do venture forth, you choose Luton?

Edited to add -

Sorry - a month. I should pay more attention, especially as it's so important and I hold the people involved in such high esteem. Gor bless 'em.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 11:58 am

I'm not spinning I'm being honest everybody spins.

Hmm. I think there might be a flaw in there somewhere jess.....

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 11:59 am

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... -providers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Open consultation
Expanding CQC ratings to include independent healthcare providers

The government would like the CQC to develop ratings for other sectors that they regulate and is seeking views on this issue.

These sectors include:

cosmetic surgery providers
independent community health service providers
independent ambulance services
independent dialysis units
refractive eye surgery providers
substance misuse centres
termination of pregnancy services

https://consultations.dh.gov.uk/cqc-spo ... iders-regu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:04 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
JonnyT1234 wrote:Bearing in mind the source is originally the Shit, former Corrie Street actor Tracy Brabin is purportedly standing for Jo Cox's seat in Batley and Spen.

Anyone know anything about it?
Never knew before that she was politically active.

She does, of course, have the inestimable advantage of not being David Miliband - another Bitterite fantasy bites the dust

Nobody rational thinks David Miliband is returning. It is a piece of silliness that is not spread by Blairites. Quite the opposite.

So who were those (of course) anonymous "Labour MPs" quoted recently, then?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:06 pm

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -take-them" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Environmental management – form
Shrews: licence to trap them

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:07 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:So who were those (of course) anonymous "Labour MPs" quoted recently, then?

Blairites. Ergo, not rational.

Hard to argue with that logic.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:10 pm

Anyway, I have voted - and the opposite way to Paul upthread. My more general analysis of things, though, chimes quite a lot with his.

Though he didn't mention one rather important individual in getting us to where we are today - H Harman

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:11 pm

Urgent live update: She's wearing a dress everyone.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:12 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote: Never knew before that she was politically active.

She does, of course, have the inestimable advantage of not being David Miliband - another Bitterite fantasy bites the dust

Nobody rational thinks David Miliband is returning. It is a piece of silliness that is not spread by Blairites. Quite the opposite.
So who were those (of course) anonymous "Labour MPs" quoted recently, then?

Every party has some idiots in it. And you'd have to be an idiot to think Miliband is ever coming back.

He still turned out to be the luckier of the two brothers. Better to lose the leadership campaign than the General Election.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:13 pm

Will's putting the sweat in. Probably the tears too later on. He's wearing a jacket and tie. In this heat.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:13 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:Urgent live update: She's wearing a dress everyone.

You tease, you. Details?

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:14 pm

PorFavor wrote:
JonnyT1234 wrote:Urgent live update: She's wearing a dress everyone.

You tease, you. Details?

It's a piece of clothing typically but not exclusively worn by females. More riveting news later. She has shoes too.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:27 pm

Labour conference could be cancelled over security row, says Unite - the guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... says-unite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, this is going to do wonders for people's perception of the Labour Party.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:29 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
JonnyT1234 wrote:Urgent live update: She's wearing a dress everyone.

You tease, you. Details?
It's a piece of clothing typically but not exclusively worn by females. More riveting news later. She has shoes too.

I read that first bit in an Airplane-stylee voice with an "but that's not important right now" at the end.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:31 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:I read that first bit in an Airplane-stylee voice with an "but that's not important right now" at the end.

Don't call me Shirley.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:36 pm

Ed never wanted Iain McNicol as General Secretary, of course. Looking ever more likely that in this - as with so much else - he was right.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:44 pm

: This is news?; image.jpeg (60.53 KiB) Viewed 7951 times

#News.

Oh, ffs, Mirror.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:47 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:Labour conference could be cancelled over security row, says Unite - the guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... says-unite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, this is going to do wonders for people's perception of the Labour Party.

Bloody hell. Isn't this sorted out yet?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:48 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Ed never wanted Iain McNicol as General Secretary, of course. Looking ever more likely that in this - as with so much else - he was right.

Which security firm not caught in the dispute with Unite or the GMB is McNicol supposed to use?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 12:49 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... tfall-2020" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Poorer renters at risk from homelessness as benefit shortfall grows
Hundreds of thousands of households face a £100-a-month gap between private rents and housing benefit by 2020, says study

http://www.fabians.org.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:02 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/housing-net ... um=twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Housing associations should fight harder to end the abuse of women
Which other organisations get such unfettered access to a person’s home? Here is how we’ve overhauled the way our housing association tackles domestic abuse

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:03 pm

What do the Labour Party and Virgin have in common? Oopsie.

Virgin Trains faces investigation by data protection watchdog

My colleague Damien Gayle has more on Virgin potentially being in hot water with the information commissioner:

Virgin Trains faces an investigation by the data protection watchdog after releasing footage of the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, looking for seats on its London to Newcastle service.

Officials at the information commissioner’s office are making inquiries over whether the train operator, owned by Sir Richard Branson, breached the Data Protection Act, which governs the release of such data.

#News

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:04 pm

HindleA wrote:Which other organisations get such unfettered access to a person’s home?

Bailiffs.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:05 pm

Jeremy Hunt weekend NHS death claims unhelpful, say civil servants (Guardian)

Well it at least had the effect of cheering me up, albeit briefly.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:07 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Jeremy Hunt weekend NHS death claims unhelpful, say civil servants (Guardian)
Well it at least had the effect of cheering me up, albeit briefly.

"unhelpful" in civil service-speak normally means "he was lying".

A bit like "brave" and courageous" don't mean that but "this is really stupid".

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:15 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Jeremy Hunt weekend NHS death claims unhelpful, say civil servants (Guardian)
Well it at least had the effect of cheering me up, albeit briefly.

The first 5 words?

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:20 pm

Afternoon

Labour conference oh dear, oh dear, oh dear

Not been a great day for Owen Smith

He made that unfortunate comment last night (is it me he does seem to get a bit carried away with his oration sometimes) and I also think he should have kept out of the Virgin train argument....his comments are unhelpful - probably not so much to Corbyn but will provide some ammunition for the TOC

Just to be clear, I have never personally criticised Smith on here to any great extent - just explained why I will not vote for him. Nothing he has done has been that bad - ill-judged perhaps and I hope that it is not blown up too much, but he should be bloody contrite about it too

Fortunately, it seems that the MSM are pretty much ignoring his 'lunatic' comment so he is lucky to that extent. His comment about the Virgin situation is also of no help....of course the Corbyn story was a bit over-simplistic and he probably could have foiund a seat if he wanted but anyone who travels regularly on Virgin trains knows what an appalling experience it can be and that this 'can sit on empty reservations' excuse is not really that simple you know! There were questions about it at the time and it was seemingly clear the train was very busy and people were not receiving the service for which they have paid.....I have sat in the corridor for a while as I could not be bothered to drag luggage around a nearly full train with no luggage space and trying to shoehorn myself into the ridiculously small seats. He described a journey I have been all too familiar with

I can also guarantee you that the Virgin representation should not be take at complete face value either......their explanations and evidence seemed a bit too contrived for me

What is disappointing is that Labour members have backed the Virgin explanation without comment or criticism and that is poor form

I expect little of a hearing on here anymore as we have any people who stand up for Corbyn in any form are declared as being in support of 'Our Glorious Leader' or phrases like 'if person X was a Corbyn supporter then they would be described as Y'.

I thought Paul's post earlier on was particulary good today, and as normal Hugo's were amazingly lacking in self awareness!

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:21 pm

Urgent live update: Shoes. No socks. It's the end of days.

(It's also over 30 degrees in my office. Having difficulty concentrating on work.)

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:34 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:Labour conference oh dear, oh dear, oh dear

I was about to say, 'good job it isn't being held in a brewery' but now I'm not so sure.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:43 pm

One thing that the Labour conference security shows, like the Olympic debacle, is that when a company grows so big that there is no alternative, the free market has failed.

Capitalists hate the free market and jump at the chance to buy up their competitors. Our company did it back in the 70s - all of the smaller companies in our sector were bought up - and some closed down. BA did it too.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 1:53 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:
PorFavor wrote:
Jeremy Hunt weekend NHS death claims unhelpful, say civil servants (Guardian)
Well it at least had the effect of cheering me up, albeit briefly.
The first 5 words?

Affirmative.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:09 pm

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016 ... ainlyMacro+(mainly+macro" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

mainly macro

Why Corbyn’s Brexit campaign matters

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:20 pm

HindleA wrote:https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016 ... nly+macro)

mainly macro

Why Corbyn’s Brexit campaign matters

Thanks for the link. Interesting read.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:30 pm

HindleA wrote:https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016 ... nly+macro)

mainly macro

Why Corbyn’s Brexit campaign matters

The problem I have with this is twofold. Firstly, Osborne and Cameron had hammed it up in the run up to the Scottish referendum. When it came to the EU referendum, there was a pinch of salt taken with whatever they uttered. Fallon joined in until it was portrayed as likely to immediately cause WWIII.

Secondly this was such a complicated issue to have a referendum that heart overrides head. Head doesn’t have much of a chance really. Outside influence of politicians, both current and past struggled to cut through. Giving Corbyn such a large slice of the blame pie whilst providing minimal to Cameron, Osborne, Johnson and lets not forget Blair is poor form.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:44 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
HindleA wrote:https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016 ... tters.html
mainly macro

Why Corbyn’s Brexit campaign matters
The problem I have with this is twofold.

It's also based on a completely bogus premise. Corbyn's team didn't rubbish the economic case for Remain, they rubbished the absurdly and completely overblown way in which Osborne presented it. Because that was what was damaging the Remain campaign. Not the economics.

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:44 pm

Deleted. Brain fart.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:48 pm

Did we see this? Happened while I was out yesterday so didn't pick it up at the time.

Justine Greening demanded Ofsted chair, David Hoare's resignation over Isle of Wight 'inbreeding' comments

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/br ... ation-over

Education secretary moved quickly after David Hoare's claims that the island was a poor, white, 'ghetto'

Justine Greening called in David Hoare to ask him to resign from his position as the chair of Ofsted, TES understands.

The education secretary had just returned from holiday and wanted to speak to Mr Hoare in person to let him know that she did not think he could carry on in his role at the inspectorate.

A source close to Ms Greening said: “The secretary of state requested his resignation. She believed that it was in the best interests of Ofsted and that it would help maintain the confidence of the education and care sectors."

Good. Shame he had to be forced to resign rather than trying to hang on though.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:50 pm

HindleA wrote:https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016 ... nly+macro)

mainly macro

Why Corbyn’s Brexit campaign matters

Hmm difficult to argue against the economic argument made in the article - what there is of it - but not so sure about the political message he is taking out of it, and looking at the political side you have to look at who he supports in the election.

His political viewpoint, to be honest, is no more relevant than mine or anyone else on here

There are a couple of things - yes Corbyn downplayed some of the economic effects but did this at all influence the result? I am not sure the economic argument did anything to convert the 'undecided' - in fact the way it was delivered may have turned people off - from some polling I have seen suggests that voters voted out despite the economic impact

Whether he could or should have said things differently is a matter for debate - perhaps he could have been more clear about the chronic economic impact - but I am not at all convinced it had any material effect at all on the vote - there is no evidence to base this assertion on

The problem Wren-Lewis has as well is that he seems to fully back Osborne's apolcalyptic assertion of economic impact....the problem is the voters voted out and 2 months later Armageddon has not yet come to pass......whatever happened to the desperately needed emergency budget after an out vote?

The economic effect will be real but will be chronic and at the moment the overplaying of the hand as to the acute effects in the lag measures makes any attempt to pull back on the vote very problematic

I personally found the Armageddon scenarios off-putting and it was interesting none of my friends who voted Leave ever showed any interest - it was all about immigration and sovereignty to them (anecdote alert!).

As mentioned above the Yes campaign expected a repeat of Scotland and it just didn't work out that

As before I will repeat - the referendum was lost due to the Tories and their CBE'd and beknighted failures in the Remain campaign!

The criticism of Corbyn is fine, but the extrapolation to the impact is very weak in my view

edited for typos

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:51 pm

Got round to voting. Similar view to some mentioned previously. I'm more interested in what happens afterwards to be honest.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 2:57 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Anyway, I have voted - and the opposite way to Paul upthread. My more general analysis of things, though, chimes quite a lot with his.

Though he didn't mention one rather important individual in getting us to where we are today - H Harman

and I doubt anyone on here will challenge your decision - it will have been made with due consideration

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 3:00 pm

FridayWaits
24 August 2016 2:29pm
So in short Virgin have -

a. Potentially broken data protection law
b. Shone a huge light on their shoddy service
c. Aggravated hundreds of thousands of very vocal Corbyn supporters that by demographic tend to be very active on social media.

Someone in their PR department really is doing a bang up job.

And who, in all honesty, that travels relatively regularly on any train service in the UK has not found themselves or other fellow passengers in exactly the same situation as Corbyn? It's happened to me on many different occasions on many different services. Right across the country, not just in London.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 3:03 pm

https://davidhencke.com/2016/08/24/why- ... d-rix-now/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why we need disability campaigners like Lord Rix now

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 3:12 pm

howsillyofme1 wrote:
HindleA wrote:https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016 ... nly+macro)

mainly macro

Why Corbyn’s Brexit campaign matters

Hmm difficult to argue against the economic argument made in the article - what there is of it - but not so sure about the political message he is taking out of it, and looking at the political side you have to look at who he supports in the election.

His political viewpoint, to be honest, is no more relevant than mine or anyone else on here

There are a couple of things - yes Corbyn downplayed some of the economic effects but did this at all influence the result? I am not sure the economic argument did anything to convert the 'undecided' - in fact the way it was delivered may have turned people off - from some polling I have seen suggests that voters voted out despite the economic impact

Whether he could or should have said things differently is a matter for debate - perhaps he could have been more clear about the chronic economic impact - but I am not at all convinced it had any material effect at all on the vote - there is no evidence to base this assertion on

The problem Wren-Lewis has as well is that he seems to fully back Osborne's apolcalyptic assertion of economic impact....the problem is the voters voted out and 2 months later Armageddon has not yet come to pass......whatever happened to the desperately needed emergency budget after an out vote?

The economic effect will be real but will be chronic and at the moment the overplaying of the hand as to the acute effects in the lag measures makes any attempt to pull back on the vote very problematic

I personally found the Armageddon scenarios off-putting and it was interesting none of my friends who voted Leave ever showed any interest - it was all about immigration and sovereignty to them (anecdote alert!).

As mentioned above the Yes campaign expected a repeat of Scotland and it just didn't work out that

As before I will repeat - the referendum was lost due to the Tories and their CBE'd and beknighted failures in the Remain campaign!

The criticism of Corbyn is fine, but the extrapolation to the impact is very weak in my view

edited for typos

This bit from the article seems to me to be a bit angels dancing on a pinhead -

The EAC certainly did not say that Corbyn should discount economists claims about economic costs, or that the likely exchange rate depreciation should not be mentioned. Some of us may have said that talk of some kind of financial crisis similar to 2008 was going over the top, but that is completely different. (A substantial depreciation is not a financial crisis.)

I mean, how much use would going on about that have been anyway, if it's a technicality (even if an important one)?

But then, I've never blamed Jeremy Corbyn for the referendum outcome.

Still, an interesting article.

Edited - typo

JonnyT1234 · Post by **JonnyT1234** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 3:53 pm

32 degrees and climbing... Bloody hell.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 4:42 pm

It's become a lot cooler here in the past hour or so. Lowering skies and a stiff breeze.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 4:47 pm

JonnyT1234 wrote:32 degrees and climbing... Bloody hell.

Ah Robert Crumb - I always preferred Gilert Shelton or Dave Sheridan for comic books, but Crumb's posters always hit the spot.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 4:59 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 07776.html

Westminster sources told The Independent civil servants are looking to see if there is any loophole, clause or issue in contracts yet to be signed that allow the Government to pull back without huge loss and while also saving face.
Ministers are acutely aware of the potential damage a withdrawal could do to relations with China, which is committed to pouring billions of pounds into the controversial project.

One comment (at time of posting}

HomoSapien
" . . . civil servants are looking to see if there is any loophole, clause or issue in contracts yet to be signed . . ."
Err, just don't sign them. That'll give you all the get-out clauses you need.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 5:28 pm

http://www.politico.eu/article/tory-dre ... servative/

The boldest option on the table — and that favored by the hardliners — is for an immediate snap Brexit, dubbed “unilateral continuity” by Tory MPs. Under this proposal the U.K. simply informs Brussels that it has left the EU and does not impose trade tariffs unless the rest of the EU does so first.
The radical plan, which veteran Euroskeptics believe is being studied seriously in Whitehall, would see May trigger Article 50 and then pass an act of parliament to annul the 1972 European Communities Act, unilaterally taking the U.K. out of the EU.
Brussels insiders dismiss the plan, insisting that it is illegal and would see the EU taking Britain to court.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 24 Aug, 2016 5:37 pm

I'm shocked etc.

Local council supports academy destroyed by fire

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/local-council- ... d-by-fire/

A local authority has taken responsibility for dealing with the aftermath of a fire, which destroyed part of an academy in its area, despite the school now being operated by an academy trust.

Selsey academy in Sussex was victim to a major fire on Sunday which saw up to 100 firefighters tackle the blaze ahead of the new academic year in just two weeks.

West Sussex county council has a statutory duty to provide emergency assistance to safeguard children, however it is unclear if the authority must cover the cost of new accommodation or buses for students to attend another school while the site is rebuilt.

and the bit that really is totally unsurprising...

The Department for Education confirmed to Schools Week that it expects councils to handle emergencies of this kind, irrespective of its push to eradicate local authority involvement in schools through its academies expansion.

Shame the council leader didn't tell Gibb and Co to fuck right off with that idea.