FlyTheNest

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 2:51 pm**

Here's another good read from Health Policy Insight on Manchester (I know, I'm getting to be a bore, but this stuff is important. Remember what Oliver Letwin said!).

http://www.healthpolicyinsight.com/?q=node/1589

EDITED to add the link to the newspaper's Healthier Together articles (referred to in previous link). So few people knew or passed comment on this.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... r-together

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 3:38 pm**

Well done Newcastle!
Peter Smith ‏@Redpeter99 · 2h2 hours ago
Didn't get into Square to hear speeches at #NewcastleUnites. Not bothered. It's more than enough to know #Pegida were outnumbered 50 to 1.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 3:43 pm**

giselle97 wrote:Here's another good read from Health Policy Insight on Manchester (I know, I'm getting to be a bore, but this stuff is important. Remember what Oliver Letwin said!).

http://www.healthpolicyinsight.com/?q=node/1589

EDITED to add the link to the newspaper's Healthier Together articles (referred to in previous link). So few people knew or passed comment on this.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... r-together

Not a bore at all giselle.
This is all very scary stuff and its a signed up, done deal. Not sure what anyone can do about it. Take over is April 2016.
I'm sad and ashamed that my council is part of the 10 who have taken the tory's gold without so much as a by-your-leave to their constituents.

Sorry Earnst, but this should have been put to the people of Manchester - at the very least - not to mention the rest of the UK who are joint owners of the NHS.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 3:47 pm**

Christopher Hope ‏@christopherhope 1h1 hour ago Poplar, London
BREAKING Diane James, Ukip's candidate at the Eastleigh by-election, has quit as a candidate at the #GE2015 for "personal reasons"

What now?

She was one of the few spokespeople who presented their sane front.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 3:53 pm**

Rebecca wrote:
giselle97 wrote:
Rebecca wrote: Ha.She didn't even acknowledge the strips of silk festooning the floor.Or the chewed up vintage velvet cushion either.Not even a shrug.Good job we love her!
Oh Rebecca - so sorry. My Dad, had a black (manual) Singer sewing machine which was a pride and joy and I remember him sitting at it many a night making clothes for us all. He used to make all the curtains for us and the neighbours queued up as well. My Auntie Daisy was also a seamstress/upholsterer. This talent doesn't run in the family, since there is still a blue and white gingham part-made apron of mine in a box somewhere from 1960s that was part of my ghastly needlework class! Memo to Giselle - throw out.

If my Dad was here today, I'm sure he would come up with all sorts of suggestions of how you could repair your curtains (and he'd probably be delighted to do it for you).

Getting back to where I started, our dog when she was a puppy did much the same as your GSD puppy has done. If it's the bottoms of the curtains only, then you can maybe cut off the shredded sections and add a replacement section - maybe in a contrasting fabric/colour. My Dad actually bought the silk to do just this from the tailor in the village who used to make all the fancy, long dresses for the ladies - sarongs and such stuff. It may not sound nice, but the curtains really looked great after. I'll try to find a photo! Vintage velvet cushion .... no answer, sorry.
No good crying over spilt milk as it were.
I have lots of leftover fabric,I can patch up the curtains,but...what if she has a taste for curtain shredding now?never touched any of them before.
She did chew up the sitting room carpet in the summer !

The only thing I can think of that might help is to regularly spray them with perfume or something that might taste nasty.

My son't young cross staffie lab, is fond of chewing fabric. Have just had to make a new cushion cover for them but thankfully she hasn't started on the curtains --- yet.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 3:58 pm**

SpinningHugo wrote:Ok, there are lots of reasons to hope for a majority Labour administration, but we have just been given a good reason to hope that Labour falls short: tuition fees.

The cut in fees is a very expensive way of giving the wealthy more. The opportunity cost is enormous.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... pretty-bad

Why, when money is so tight, has Labour opted for such an expensive sop to the wealthiest?

Because our leader was elected on a pledge to bin tuition fees

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... are_btn_tw

Without that, his brother would currently be leader of the opposition.

A graduate tax is a deeply stupid policy. It has been reviewed time and again. Nobody who has seriously looked at higher education policy supports it. No actual government would adopt it. So, something had to be done even if it was not a graduate tax.

The tuition fee cut has no support from anyone interested in University funding. If Labour falls short of a majority, it will be quickly abandoned.

Any cut in fees benefits the wealthy. Even if they had to pay their tuition fees up front, it'd be little or no obstacle to them; especially those whose children went to Public School. You can buy an entire three-year degree course for the same price as just one year at the mid-to-upper range of Public Schools and it's even more of a bargain if you've been paying for weekly, let alone, termly boarding on top. On top of the tuition fees question there's also the Maintenance Loan. Encourage your little darling to take out the Maintenance Loan, put the cheque each term's cheque into a high-interest deposit account because they really don't need it, thanks to their allowance, so the money mounts up and so does the earned interest, then withdraw it all as soon as Finals are over, repay the loan (and a minimal, if any, amount of interest) immediately and go on a celebratory holiday (or throw a party) with the interest earned. And there's probably no rent to pay on the student-flat/house because the mortgage (if such a thing were required) and all the bills are covered by the other students you let the spare rooms to; and, at the end of it, either you sell it (probably a nice profit as it's in one of the more desirable areas with a student/young-professionals catchment) or continue as landlord until selling it to provide a deposit for sprog on the occasion of their marriage. Or something.

Any cut in fees also benefits the poorer. Their total student debt is lower than it otherwise would be, at the end of their course, so they have a better chance of paying it off and the eventual write-offs are lower. They're unlikely to be able to afford to simply bank a Maintenance Loan, more likely to need to apply for a Maintenance Grant and then work part-to-full-time on top to cover rents and living expenses.

At the time Ed M was elected, he was talking about £3,000 per year tuition-fees to £0 – a reduction of £3,000 per year. He warned that the Coalition were likely to increase tuition fees to close to £10,000 a year by the end of the Parliament. £9,000 per year is pretty damned close to that. I'm saddened that we're still only talking about a £3,000 per year reduction but it's still better than a slap in the face with a wet fish. I'd rather see even that reduction paid for out of general taxation but paying for it out of a reduction in tax-relief to the wealthiest people (those building massive pension pots) is a good start, and could be built on or shifted to general taxation in time. The responsibility for identifying graduates doesn't then fall on HMRC, as it would with an across-the-board graduate tax.

On top of that, increasing the Maintenance Grant and paying for that by increasing the interest on Student Loan repayments from 3% to 4% for graduates earning over £42,000 a year strikes me as a fairly good idea.

Further questions how the hell you increase pay for lecturers (especially junior-lecturers) remain to be answered but I hope they'll be addressed. And there's the big, big question of funding for further education colleges which is still the Cinderella of the whole system – but there's no Prince yet, so no hope of a ball...

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 4:16 pm**

Reading Buses: more passengers, more money, more journeys, more staff

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local- ... re-8728722

I didn't realise there were some councils that still owned/ran their own bus service.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 4:22 pm**

You're George Osborne.

You're interested in devolved healthcare in the North West.

Luckily you inherit exactly that!

NHS Ashton, Leigh and Wigan
Bolton PCT
Bury PCT
Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale PCT
Manchester PCT (Merged from Manchester North, South and Central PCTs)
NHS Oldham
Salford PCT
Stockport PCT
Tameside and Glossop PCT - This PCT reported to the North West SHA, though part it (Glossop) fell geographically within the East Midlands SHA
Trafford PCT

You abolish these and bring in a structure nobody understands.

Get out of here.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 4:29 pm**

SpinningHugo wrote:Ok, there are lots of reasons to hope for a majority Labour administration, but we have just been given a good reason to hope that Labour falls short: tuition fees.

The cut in fees is a very expensive way of giving the wealthy more. The opportunity cost is enormous.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... pretty-bad

Why, when money is so tight, has Labour opted for such an expensive sop to the wealthiest?

Because our leader was elected on a pledge to bin tuition fees

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... are_btn_tw

Without that, his brother would currently be leader of the opposition.

A graduate tax is a deeply stupid policy. It has been reviewed time and again. Nobody who has seriously looked at higher education policy supports it. No actual government would adopt it. So, something had to be done even if it was not a graduate tax.

The tuition fee cut has no support from anyone interested in University funding. If Labour falls short of a majority, it will be quickly abandoned.

I've made the point you do about tuition fees in Scotland, where they've been preserved by terrible under the radar cuts to FE among other things.

I've always thought though that £9k is far too much though. The most well-off get the whole lot paid by family anyway, so bringing those down aren't a gift to the richest, like you say.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 4:35 pm**

This is from the G piece on Caroline Lucas - http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ying-about

In May, she might well make trouble for the mainstream political parties. Lucas knows that if the Greens have a good election, it could be bad news for Labour and result in a Conservative victory. She says that a second Tory term is the last thing she wants, but, in the long term, it could be the best thing possible for the Greens if Labour lost. “That wouldn’t be the outcome I wished for. But I would think, ‘Now, for heaven’s sake, Labour, you have to embrace electoral reform’ because we are operating under a voting system that is creaking at the seams, that is not fit for purpose.” This would probably come in some form of proportional representation, which could only empower the Greens.

Can someone explain how Labour could embrace electoral reform - in any meaningful way i.e. get something done about it - if they are not in government? There seems to be an inherent contradiction in this expectation. Surely the minor parties will have a much better chance of persuading Labour re electoral reform if its a bargaining chip for supporting them in government (not opposition)?

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 4:43 pm**

rebeccariots2 wrote:This is from the G piece on Caroline Lucas - http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ying-about
In May, she might well make trouble for the mainstream political parties. Lucas knows that if the Greens have a good election, it could be bad news for Labour and result in a Conservative victory. She says that a second Tory term is the last thing she wants, but, in the long term, it could be the best thing possible for the Greens if Labour lost. “That wouldn’t be the outcome I wished for. But I would think, ‘Now, for heaven’s sake, Labour, you have to embrace electoral reform’ because we are operating under a voting system that is creaking at the seams, that is not fit for purpose.” This would probably come in some form of proportional representation, which could only empower the Greens.
Can someone explain how Labour could embrace electoral reform - in any meaningful way i.e. get something done about it - if they are not in government? There seems to be an inherent contradiction in this expectation. Surely the minor parties will have a much better chance of persuading Labour re electoral reform if its a bargaining chip for supporting them in government (not opposition)?

She means start arguing for it in Opposition, doesn't she?

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 4:48 pm**

Giselle's link reminded me there used to be .... Greater Manchester Strategic Health Authority.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 4:54 pm**

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:This is from the G piece on Caroline Lucas - http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ying-about
In May, she might well make trouble for the mainstream political parties. Lucas knows that if the Greens have a good election, it could be bad news for Labour and result in a Conservative victory. She says that a second Tory term is the last thing she wants, but, in the long term, it could be the best thing possible for the Greens if Labour lost. “That wouldn’t be the outcome I wished for. But I would think, ‘Now, for heaven’s sake, Labour, you have to embrace electoral reform’ because we are operating under a voting system that is creaking at the seams, that is not fit for purpose.” This would probably come in some form of proportional representation, which could only empower the Greens.
Can someone explain how Labour could embrace electoral reform - in any meaningful way i.e. get something done about it - if they are not in government? There seems to be an inherent contradiction in this expectation. Surely the minor parties will have a much better chance of persuading Labour re electoral reform if its a bargaining chip for supporting them in government (not opposition)?
She means start arguing for it in Opposition, doesn't she?

But that makes it exactly what I said - contradictory in expectation - Labour won't be in a position to effect anything positive re PR in opposition. Arguing for means nothing .... The Tories will be in power - and have already made it clear that they will be bringing in a whole lot of nips and tucks re boundary changes, EVEL etc that will work to stitch up the FPTP bias to suit them ... No constitutional convention under the Tories which might give an opportunity for the issue of PR to resurface.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:08 pm**

Tim Shipman ‏@ShippersUnbound 13m13 minutes ago
Every hack in the land crossing their fingers for the great @bbcnickrobinson who is having treatment for a tumour on the lung.

Jane Merrick ‏@janemerrick23 15m15 minutes ago
Wishing @bbcnickrobinson a speedy recovery http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31676896?o ... ow_twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:10 pm**

I've moaned about him and his style but sincerely hope Nick Robinson's op is successful.
He is expected to be back by May.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 77436.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:11 pm**

Snap again RR !

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:12 pm**

Whatever we think of him, he has a wife and kids and it is a horrible thing to happen to anybody.

Hopefully he will emerge OK from this, ideally with a better perspective of what really matters.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:18 pm**

Another wholly divisive and perverse policy from the coalition ... looks like BTL are not taken in by this pre election bribery. This policy will just increase house prices and keep the housing market over inflated. Really pisses me off that tax payers money is being used to support this kind of subsidy. Hope someone challenges this in the courts on the grounds of age discrimination.

First-time buyers in England offered 20% discount on new homes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31668135
First-time buyers under the age of 40 in England can now register to buy new homes at a discount of up to 20% off the normal price.

The offer is part of the government's new "starter homes" scheme to encourage home ownership and construction on previously used "brownfield" land...

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:31 pm**

Robin Brant ‏@robindbrant 4m4 minutes ago
.@DianeJamesMEP tells me she has stood down as a #ukip candidate in #ge2015 for 'totally personal reasons' and doesn't add any more detail.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:31 pm**

rebeccariots2 wrote:Another wholly divisive and perverse policy from the coalition ... looks like BTL are not taken in by this pre election bribery. This policy will just increase house prices and keep the housing market over inflated. Really pisses me off that tax payers money is being used to support this kind of subsidy. Hope someone challenges this in the courts on the grounds of age discrimination.

First-time buyers in England offered 20% discount on new homes
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31668135
First-time buyers under the age of 40 in England can now register to buy new homes at a discount of up to 20% off the normal price.

The offer is part of the government's new "starter homes" scheme to encourage home ownership and construction on previously used "brownfield" land...

Note too-

The 20% discount is achieved by waiving local authority fees for homebuilders of at least £45,000 per dwelling on brownfield sites.

That devolution agenda!

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:34 pm**

Another see-saw poll in tomorrow's Observer.

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 4m4 minutes ago

Opinium poll for Observer LAB 35 CON 34 LD 6 UKIP 14 GRN 6
0 replies 0 retweets 0 favorites
Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 5m5 minutes ago

LAB back in the lead with Opinium for the Observer
0 replies 0 retweets 0 favorites

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:43 pm**

Anyone know what the Kipper education policy is, yet?

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:44 pm**

Changes from the last Opinium/Observer poll

Conservative -1
Labour +2
Liberal Democrat n/c
UKIP -1
Green -1
Other +1

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:49 pm**

Paul Barker never lets you down

''...now we should be focused on rebuilding our party & replacing Labour. Most of you will think thats nuts but I beleive Labour will collapse at this Election.''

http://www.libdemvoice.org/tim-farron-t ... l#comments" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:52 pm**

NumbrCrunchrPolitics ‏@NCPoliticsUK 14 mins14 minutes ago
Opinium/Observer:

CON 34 (-1)
LAB 35 (+2)
LIB 6 (=)
UKIP 14 (-1)
GRN 6 (-1)

Fieldwork 24th-27th

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 5:54 pm**

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 2 mins2 minutes ago

Pic from @SLATUKIP of UKIP conference. Women? Non-white? Young? I can't see many

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:01 pm**

It looks like a meeting of the Grumpy Old Git Party.
What have they done with the women ? Sent them off to make the tea ?

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:01 pm**

refitman wrote:Anyone know what the Kipper education policy is, yet?

Grammar schools, grammar schools, grammar schools. Selected degree courses free if you live, work, and pay taxes for a guaranteed 5 years after graduation. The selection doesn't include arts, humanities, or languages. Naturally. Or so I either heard or read, earlier.

Aside: Also hope Nick Robinson's operation and treatment is successful. Regardless of who it happens to cancer is a cruel disease.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:02 pm**

yahyah wrote:Paul Barker never lets you down

''...now we should be focused on rebuilding our party & replacing Labour. Most of you will think thats nuts but I beleive Labour will collapse at this Election.''

http://www.libdemvoice.org/tim-farron-t ... l#comments" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour at 35 per cent in latest poll, LibDems 6 per cent. F*** me

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:02 pm**

Should have gone to Specsavers, there are two women there.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:07 pm**

Not sure if anyone posted this. In a way you can't help hoping it isn't true. Just horrible.

It's alleged Peter Righton attacked and killed a man with Downs Syndrome because he was 'irritated' by him.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5501/ ... tic-murder

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:09 pm**

What are those 'things' attached to many of the empty seats at the back of the hall? Face-shaped, dark stripe where eyes would be – a wide shot from the back of the stage could make it look as if there were people sat back there...

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:13 pm**

yahyah wrote:Paul Barker never lets you down

''...now we should be focused on rebuilding our party & replacing Labour. Most of you will think thats nuts but I beleive Labour will collapse at this Election.''

http://www.libdemvoice.org/tim-farron-t ... l#comments" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This also made me laugh, Welsh Lib Dem Conference has been on BBC2 Wales this afternoon, I resisted the temptation to watch, I didn't really need to as I could imagine Williams, arms folded, preaching to a half empty room, nodding to herself when she assumed she had said something clever or resonant.

http://www.libdemvoice.org/kirsty-willi ... 44837.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:13 pm**

yahyah wrote:Not sure if anyone posted this. In a way you can't help hoping it isn't true. Just horrible.

It's alleged Peter Righton attacked and killed a man with Downs Syndrome because he was 'irritated' by him.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5501/ ... tic-murder

Seconded, @yahyah. It's dreadful.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:30 pm**

yahyah wrote:

It looks like a meeting of the Grumpy Old Git Party.
What have they done with the women ? Sent them off to make the tea ?

So,what do you think those silly old sods did with their free condoms?
Have they come to Margate without their wives and are going to have some safe sex with a nubile stranger?

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:45 pm**

refitman wrote:Anyone know what the Kipper education policy is, yet?

Ukip and Sex Education ..

Scroll down to the leaflet

https://aliberallife.wordpress.com/2014 ... -ukip-way/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 6:56 pm**

Ed Miliband On Tuition Fees Cut: “No Ifs, No Buts, No Nick Cleggs – We’re Going To Do It.”
The Labour leader tells BuzzFeed News why his party wants to help the young instead of the old. Oh, and he gives his verdict on The Dress, too.

Bit of a sneery edge to it, but I like the “No Ifs, No Buts, No Nick Cleggs" in the headline

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/ed- ... nick-clegg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 7:30 pm**

Didn't Janet Daley come up with something like this last week ?
David Cameron’s party isn’t likeable – and that is a big problem
The Tories are trusted on the economy, but they could fail to turn that into an election victory, thanks to a feeling that they are too closely allied to the 1 per cent

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... oblem.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 7:36 pm**

We were out canvassing in our village again this morning. We did the same route that we did last year in early November. I spoke with a couple who had told us they were Conservative then - who today told me they were sick of what we've got and would be voting Labour this time. The woman in particular said she was utterly disgusted with Cameron and how he had behaved over HSBC and the tax dodging .... Later on a chap who has always voted Labour told me he would be doing so again but ... and he made a face and waved his hand from side to side ... I took it to mean he wasn't that impressed and asked him why. He said he hadn't been sure about Miliband as leader ... but then said 'you know, he's come pretty good in the last few weeks hasn't he?'.

We had some students from Aberystwyth University with us - real young people. They were lovely - didn't have enough clothes on for the weather though - one of them looked shivery. I felt sorry for him in particular - he got our only tirade of the day. A woman opened the door and let rip at him about the only party she would vote for would be the one that restored her pension properly - it was a proper shout too.

We've got a good list together of people who've said they're interested in coming along to an informal drinks and discussion session with Paul our candidate at the local pub at the end of March. I'm going to be busy printing up invites and delivering.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 7:54 pm**

rebeccariots2 wrote:We were out canvassing in our village again this morning. We did the same route that we did last year in early November. I spoke with a couple who had told us they were Conservative then - who today told me they were sick of what we've got and would be voting Labour this time. The woman in particular said she was utterly disgusted with Cameron and how he had behaved over HSBC and the tax dodging .... Later on a chap who has always voted Labour told me he would be doing so again but ... and he made a face and waved his hand from side to side ... I took it to mean he wasn't that impressed and asked him why. He said he hadn't been sure about Miliband as leader ... but then said 'you know, he's come pretty good in the last few weeks hasn't he?'.

We had some students from Aberystwyth University with us - real young people. They were lovely - didn't have enough clothes on for the weather though - one of them looked shivery. I felt sorry for him in particular - he got our only tirade of the day. A woman opened the door and let rip at him about the only party she would vote for would be the one that restored her pension properly - it was a proper shout too.

We've got a good list together of people who've said they're interested in coming along to an informal drinks and discussion session with Paul our candidate at the local pub at the end of March. I'm going to be busy printing up invites and delivering.

Thanks Rebecca. I love it when you bring us updates from the doorstep

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:02 pm**

AngryAsWell wrote:Didn't Janet Daley come up with something like this last week ?
David Cameron’s party isn’t likeable – and that is a big problem
The Tories are trusted on the economy, but they could fail to turn that into an election victory, thanks to a feeling that they are too closely allied to the 1 per cent

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... oblem.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's not just a feeling is it?!

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:07 pm**

"Labour has a solid lead on protecting the interests of university students – but they are tied with the Conservatives when it comes to protecting universities themselves."
School teachers score pretty high as well.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/02/27/la ... -students/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This bit interests me because during "fresher's" week at our local Uni (which coincided with the so called "Green Surge") the Greens had a promotional stall encouraging people to register and vote, so had a large presence on the campuses, but don't seem to have benefited from it.
"The Green party, who have surged in popularity among young people in recent months and are thought to have a strong support base among students, are only chosen by 6% as being most able to protect university students."

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:16 pm**

Have we done this?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mi ... ed-5250713" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A million more families will pay the hated bedroom tax if cameron wins in May.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:19 pm**

Harriet Harman's pink bus stunt branded 'patronising and stereotyping' at UKIP conference

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/561080 ... -bus-stunt

This is so silly. I follow some Labour groups from all over the country, and I'd say the pink bus is a huge success.
Big groups of women getting together to discuss their lives and what they'd like to see happen. There's not another political party that can say they're doing that.

I'm going to be daring and say if Ed wins it'll be down to women.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:39 pm**

ohsocynical wrote:
Harriet Harman's pink bus stunt branded 'patronising and stereotyping' at UKIP conference

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/561080 ... -bus-stunt
This is so silly. I follow some Labour groups from all over the country, and I'd say the pink bus is a huge success.
Big groups of women getting together to discuss their lives and what they'd like to see happen. There's not another political party that can say they're doing that.

I'm going to be daring and say if Ed wins it'll be down to women.

Quite possibly Ohso

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:43 pm**

ohsocynical wrote:
Harriet Harman's pink bus stunt branded 'patronising and stereotyping' at UKIP conference

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/561080 ... -bus-stunt
This is so silly. I follow some Labour groups from all over the country, and I'd say the pink bus is a huge success.
Big groups of women getting together to discuss their lives and what they'd like to see happen. There's not another political party that can say they're doing that.

I'm going to be daring and say if Ed wins it'll be down to women.

I completely agree. Any (faux) controversy over the colour can't take away from the fact that what Labour are doing with their bus is a very positive thing. Besides which red would have made it look too much like a London bus and any other colour would be too closely associated with other parties across the political spectrum. Pink is actually associated with social democracy in France and Portugal, to differentiate from more left-wing communist or socialist parties which tend to use red. So it's not really a very remarkable colour for Labour to choose out of a small choice (blue, yellow, purple and green would all be out for a start). At least the media are still talking about it, normally the media are keen to ignore anything Labour does that might prove popular!

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:44 pm**

What an odd article

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6c791762-bf82 ... z3SzdeMieF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think it's the very fact that the FT feels it necessary to report on UKIP's policy on Electoral Reform tat made it weird for me.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 8:49 pm**

I think the "magenta" is very striking. Quite daring and modern.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 9:06 pm**

AngryAsWell wrote:
giselle97 wrote:Here's another good read from Health Policy Insight on Manchester (I know, I'm getting to be a bore, but this stuff is important. Remember what Oliver Letwin said!).

http://www.healthpolicyinsight.com/?q=node/1589

EDITED to add the link to the newspaper's Healthier Together articles (referred to in previous link). So few people knew or passed comment on this.

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... r-together
Not a bore at all giselle.
This is all very scary stuff and its a signed up, done deal. Not sure what anyone can do about it. Take over is April 2016.
I'm sad and ashamed that my council is part of the 10 who have taken the tory's gold without so much as a by-your-leave to their constituents.
Sorry Earnst, but this should have been put to the people of Manchester - at the very least - not to mention the rest of the UK who are joint owners of the NHS.

Hi AAW, don't disagree, except to point out that government does an awful lot of stuff without directly consulting the people affected by it. This is no different. And noone should make either of the following mistakes: (a) that the AGMA leaders in the negotiations are patsies; they're not, they're all as hard as nails and political operators who realise that if it fucks up, it'll come back to bite them, and (b) that this will all actually take place in April 2015. I spoke last Wednesday evening after full council to the head of our health scrutiny committee and the cabinet member for adult socal care, and both were extremely skeptical that any such changes will happen by that date.

As a long term aspiration for a properly funded NHS it would be a good thing, and might encourage a more integrated view of health and social care, which is, after all, Burnham's view is it not? It's - as many realise - Osborne politicking to garner votes. Sadly, he's picked the wrong city.

Posted: **Sat 28 Feb, 2015 9:13 pm**

Sir Cliff Richard: Lawyers hit out at MP's disclosures
Lawyers for Sir Cliff Richard attack the Home Affairs Select Committee for releasing a letter revealing he was facing more than one allegation

http://flythenest.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&p=33933#p33933

When that particular news item broke I cynically reckoned Dave would be delighted because it might deflect attention from the HSBC scandal.

Looks as if I was right. Without a doubt this is the seediest government ever.

FlyTheNest

Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015

Re: Saturday 28th Feb & Sunday 1st March 2015