Tuesday 30th May 2017

Post by **refitman** » Tue 30 May, 2017 7:00 am

Morning all.

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Tue 30 May, 2017 7:16 am

Bonjour les saboteurs

Tsk tsk . Shortly after 6.30 on the Today programme, the bbc political correspondent spoke of her being heckled, and —

” instead of being a ‘bloody difficult woman’ she was a ‘bloody evasive woman’ “

Knuckles to be rapped there !

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Tue 30 May, 2017 7:32 am

Crace from last night --

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... of-her-own" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Tue 30 May, 2017 8:43 am

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... n-teachers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Academy Trusts failing, teachers overworked and demoralised, a Very English Story.

On Toady this morning bloody Humphrys was contemptuous about teachers feeling overworked , before it was pointed out that forrin teachers have much more paid time to prepare lessons and for continued training .

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Tue 30 May, 2017 9:03 am

Lastly, this one is a frightener for the future 'negotiations' --

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -documents" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Painstaking detail of Brexit process revealed in EU documents

Policy papers released without fanfare elaborate bloc’s stance and make clearer its demands for protection of citizens’ rights

Woe for the winner of this election .

bifn

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 9:08 am

Morning

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_li ... g=8&order=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corbyn Webchat with mumsnet from noon(thanks to Mr.Sparrow for mention)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 9:15 am

Disability hustings from 14.30

https://www.mencap.org.uk/get-involved/ ... q=hustings" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 9:21 am

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... orbyn-hope" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Theresa May is the most incompetent leader in all the elections I’ve seen

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 9:49 am

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 9:53 am

Good-morning, everyone

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 9:56 am

Special howdy to frog222
Good to read you

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 10:00 am

https://jennymorrisnet.blogspot.co.uk/2 ... ndent.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A 'Dementia tax" or a right to independent living?
Jenny Morris

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 30 May, 2017 10:08 am

Morning all.

Brexit day for May. I'm surprised she hasn't floated the idea of making the final day a public holiday to remember our great Britishness. Take that Johnny foreigner!

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 30 May, 2017 10:09 am

HindleA wrote:https://jennymorrisnet.blogspot.co.uk/2 ... ndent.html

A 'Dementia tax" or a right to independent living?
Jenny Morris

Good blog. She's got it spot on. And how the Mail shot down the only realistic proposal to date. Worth looking at what the UK's most read paper made of the interviews last night, as well, as their opinion is unfortunately influential. Know your enemy and all that.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **adam** » Tue 30 May, 2017 10:52 am

The point not made loudly enough about 'death taxes' and so on is that, overwhelmingly, the 'wealth' people are seeking to protect by saying that it shouldn't be spent on social care is wealth that has accumulated largely, or even solely, because of the performance of the housing market and is wealth that has never been subject to taxation.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:02 am

adam wrote:The point not made loudly enough about 'death taxes' and so on is that, overwhelmingly, the 'wealth' people are seeking to protect by saying that it shouldn't be spent on social care is wealth that has accumulated largely, or even solely, because of the performance of the housing market and is wealth that has never been subject to taxation.

Hello there

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:03 am

adam wrote:The point not made loudly enough about 'death taxes' and so on is that, overwhelmingly, the 'wealth' people are seeking to protect by saying that it shouldn't be spent on social care is wealth that has accumulated largely, or even solely, because of the performance of the housing market and is wealth that has never been subject to taxation.

Which is why I think Burnham's idea of a modest wealth tax on all estates to fund universal social care for everyone who needs it is a good idea.
What May is doing is counting a home as an asset while someone is still living in it and this financialisation of shelter, a basic human need, is what's so wrong with our housing market in the first place. For me, the distinction between the two plans is stark, but I suspect a lot of people don't get this distinction.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:22 am

It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:25 am

Morning all.

John Dickens‏ @JohndickensSW 3m3 minutes ago
More
Breaking: NCTL discontinues cases against five teachers in Trojan Horse cases after abuse of process.

That's an abuse of process by DfE lawyers no less.

and

Richard Adams‏Verified account @RichardA 4m4 minutes ago
More
Replying to @RichardA
That means the NCTL hearings against the Park View leadership has ended.

I can't remember now how many people - staff or governors - have actually been banned over this whole affair. Not many.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:30 am

StephenDolan wrote:It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.

Ah, the "pub quiz question gotcha" syndrome. Still, that's the BBC for you now.

Jez is on Mumsnet later, I bet they treat him more sensibly.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:34 am

Some interesting questions,wonder if he will answer the lucky underwear on election night one.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:35 am

adam wrote:The point not made loudly enough about 'death taxes' and so on is that, overwhelmingly, the 'wealth' people are seeking to protect by saying that it shouldn't be spent on social care is wealth that has accumulated largely, or even solely, because of the performance of the housing market and is wealth that has never been subject to taxation.

You've just solved the UK's productivity problem
and explained a lot else too

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:37 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.
Ah, the "pub quiz question gotcha" syndrome. Still, that's the BBC for you now.

Jez is on Mumsnet later, I bet they treat him more sensibly.

It doesn't matter what he answers, it's only newsworthy if there's a ZOMG he wouldn't choose a biscuit! moment.

In other news, May says that without a good Brexit deal public services cannot be properly funded. Given that she's said that she would walk away with no deal... oh come on political journalists, join the freaking dots.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:46 am

StephenDolan wrote:It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.

Tory leadership don't obey the rules others must
It's not a fair contest

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:47 am

On Jeremy Vine Today,
Paul Nuttall, Garry Kasparov, strokes and Welsh election TV debate.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:52 am

Biscuit question asked

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 30 May, 2017 11:55 am

StephenDolan wrote:It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.

I'm not sure the Tories not providing any figures has gone down that well.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 30 May, 2017 12:05 pm

Here's the article on why the Trojan Horse case against teachers was thrown out.

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/trojan-horse-n ... -teachers/

The panel was due to deliver its verdict on the fate of Arshad Hussain, Hardeen Saini, Lindsey Clark and Monzoor Hussain in December, but the decision was delayed after it emerged that there were transcripts from witnesses who gave evidence to Clarke that had not been disclosed as part of the proceedings.

and

The panel also considered there to be a “lack of openness” by the NCTL and its solicitors over the failures and a lack of cooperation in assisting the panel to get to the bottom of what happened.

Far be it for me to suggest that the NCTL was being leaned on from above...

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 30 May, 2017 12:07 pm

StephenDolan wrote:It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.

If you're specifically going on a programme to discuss a policy then you should at least have the cost of that policy to hand. If they stray off topic and ask about costings of something else, then by all means stall.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 30 May, 2017 12:16 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.
If you're specifically going on a programme to discuss a policy then you should at least have the cost of that policy to hand. If they stray off topic and ask about costings of something else, then by all means stall.

After a solid performance last night, the Woman's Hour interview was disappointing. The following in particular could prove damaging:

Q: You have said you would give pension credit to help some of the Waspi women (the women who lose out from the increase in the state pension age). And you say you will look at other ways of compensating them.

Corbyn says the principle is that they will not lose out. He says Labour has not had time to develop more detailed policies.

Doesn't really convey the sense of an opposition ready to take the reins of government, does it?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 30 May, 2017 12:18 pm

Well, they hadn't planned for this election now. Top Tories had at least some inkling of it - what's their excuse?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 30 May, 2017 12:40 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Well, they hadn't planned for this election now. Top Tories had at least some inkling of it - what's their excuse?

What, you think the press are going to play fair? It was a stupid slip, possibly overshadowed by not knowing the figures on this occasion, but the kind of slip Corbyn can't afford nevertheless. The one thing voters definitely don't want to hear from a potential PM is that they aren't prepared for government.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 30 May, 2017 12:53 pm

Of course I don't.

But overall the Labour manifesto holds together pretty well given that it was indeed a rushed job.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:01 pm

[youtube]xxf9O1Ielo8[/youtube]

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:06 pm

Good morfternoon.

Re-listening to Theresa May's Wolverhampton speech. "Brexit" will keep us out of the clutches of the ECJ.

Is she aware of this (below)?

Britain’s most senior EU official has warned that a post-Brexit Britain would have to recognise the rulings of the European court of justice if it wished to maintain the current level of cooperation in countering terrorism and organised crime. (Guardian, 30 April 2017)

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... ooperation

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:16 pm

Barry Gardiner is on good form on WATO.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:20 pm

Willow904 wrote:
adam wrote:The point not made loudly enough about 'death taxes' and so on is that, overwhelmingly, the 'wealth' people are seeking to protect by saying that it shouldn't be spent on social care is wealth that has accumulated largely, or even solely, because of the performance of the housing market and is wealth that has never been subject to taxation.
Which is why I think Burnham's idea of a modest wealth tax on all estates to fund universal social care for everyone who needs it is a good idea.
What May is doing is counting a home as an asset while someone is still living in it and this financialisation of shelter, a basic human need, is what's so wrong with our housing market in the first place. For me, the distinction between the two plans is stark, but I suspect a lot of people don't get this distinction.

I have spent a while trying to explain this to people. In some cases the family carer may be a live in family member who has cared for years. It is not just th financialisation of shelter, but also home. I do realise that for those who translate everything in life to economic worth or value that both of these may seem woolly concepts. .

While the first is a fundamental need the second is a universal desire.

And then there is the matter of independent living, as Jenny so rightly points out. And almost all, including those with the eponymous condition do have some kind of agency, whether it is to express a choice of food or drink, or to get to sit in the sun for a while, or just choose their own clothes, they retain for the most part the ability to choose.

This was demonstrated to me very well by the good care given by dementia friendly assessment unit staff and patients quite far into active progrssion of their condition. And that is at the very hard ends of things, but dementia tax itself as a descriptor is so far from the truth of where need for good provision of funding for independent living is as to be risable. It discounts and demeans the lived experience that evidences the sheer complexity of need and reduces it to a two word cipher. It removes the neccessity of social interaction, of the potential for engagement, the need for stimulus, the reduction or lessening of the oppressiveness of limititation, and reduces people to some equation of functionality, bare existence instead of life. This is callous beyond belief.

The best argument against Mays current plans are that it intendifies this process instead of making things better. When it fails are a model for care, which it will do, then all the efforts of the individual concerned, to maintain that shelter and sense of home will be gone anyway along with that of other family. It is one thing to make a reluctant choice in the matter, another entirely to become part of a state enterprise that is dependent on your demise. A flawed enterprise. And there lies the difference. Regardless of what sweetener they offer in the way od 'wealth retained' by potential inheritees. Not to mention the whole toxicity of the debate anyway. Someone described it as a reverse mortgage for which people would also have to pay. In which the inevitable will be a huge transfer of wealth away from individuals to the private corporate things we are already enduring being yoked to.

This is not care from cradle to grave, so far have things strayed from that we now have the prospect of being owned from cradle to grave.

Too scared to hope right now.
Of course for those without tangible assets the picture is even grimmer.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:20 pm

I watched a few minutes of Sky News last night after the 'debate', Boulton in the spin room, he was very rude to Gardiner, cut him off after a minute and went to speak to someone else. Maybe Gardiner had been getting air time earlier, or maybe not.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:29 pm

Theresa May is speaking in Wolverhampton now.

[She says]"I am prepared. I’m ready to go." (Politics Live, Guardian)

Well hurry up and sod off, then.

Edited to attribute quote

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:33 pm

Willow904 wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:It would appear that having costings in a manifesto but not knowing them off by heart is A Very Bad Thing, whereas not providing any figures is perfectly acceptable. Right.
If you're specifically going on a programme to discuss a policy then you should at least have the cost of that policy to hand. If they stray off topic and ask about costings of something else, then by all means stall.
After a solid performance last night, the Woman's Hour interview was disappointing. The following in particular could prove damaging:

Q: You have said you would give pension credit to help some of the Waspi women (the women who lose out from the increase in the state pension age). And you say you will look at other ways of compensating them.

Corbyn says the principle is that they will not lose out. He says Labour has not had time to develop more detailed policies.
Doesn't really convey the sense of an opposition ready to take the reins of government, does it?

You're being generous by describing that interview as disappointing. It was excruciating !

His Mumsnet chat didn't go down well either. Page 5 of the site lists reactions & it's not good reading:

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_li ... ssages=100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:36 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Of course I don't.

But overall the Labour manifesto holds together pretty well given that it was indeed a rushed job.

Hang on, Corbyn promised he would put the party on an election footing way back in September when he was challenging Owen Smith for re-election.

eremy Corbyn will put Labour on a general election footing if he is re-elected leader, Newsnight has learned.
Mr Corbyn is planning to tell the party that Theresa May could call an election as early as next spring to secure a mandate for her Brexit negotiations.

The leader hopes the prospect of an early poll might instil some discipline among Labour MPs, and he would help bring it about.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37413848" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 30 May, 2017 1:44 pm

Yes of course Corbyn (and Watson and others) said that. But I'm not sure they actually really believed it.

Just weeks before its announcement, No 10 explicitly said there would *not* be an early election. It caught virtually everybody by surprise.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:01 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Yes of course Corbyn (and Watson and others) said that. But I'm not sure they actually really believed it.

Just weeks before its announcement, No 10 explicitly said there would *not* be an early election. It caught virtually everybody by surprise.

Yes but some people have to keep up the attacks on JC and Labour in spite off whats happening in this election, because it sort of proves the last two years of nonsense for the nonsense it was, and they simply cant have that, can they?

Look at the twitter feeds of the chicken coup leaders, Jess Phillips et al, no mention of corbyn or even labour policies mostly. It's pathetic.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:09 pm

And its funny you link the mumsnet - post chat comments by people like Lisa Muggrdge et al (and itss not as if she is unbiased now is she) but not tothe start of the chat or 4 pages of positive comments before page 5? An oversight I am sure, as the chat itself didnt go to badly at all, now did it...

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:13 pm

Ah pk1, no comments on the May v Corbyn from last night, or is it just a quick comment on The Catastrophic radio interview?

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:14 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Yes of course Corbyn (and Watson and others) said that. But I'm not sure they actually really believed it.

Just weeks before its announcement, No 10 explicitly said there would *not* be an early election. It caught virtually everybody by surprise.

I am not sure it did, AK. I know I was aware that preparations were being made for that eventuality. I doubt that Corbyns inability to summon up the right info this morning had anything to do with that. He sounded tired, and well he might be, he has had a punishing schedule for weeks now, he did the right thing and refused to be inaccurate when he hit the kind of blip that could happen to anyone. And instead of being given the respect of being allowed to remind himself of the detail he was subjected not only to being harried relentlessly but having every action of his in the studio being relayed to the public. Most people would be discombobulated by the distracting nature of being personally picked on with no room for though. This would not have happened to May. I am sure if he had been able to catch up in the way he requested he would have had the necessary recall to discuss it further. It is galling to hear the lack of parity in action. Nobody seems to be that interested in holding May to any kind of account, for the past present or future. Even Paxman just repeated the same old stuff endlessly.

Still we always knew it would get dirty.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:14 pm

I was there,it was a mixture of swooning,trolling and sensible questons.He wasn't there that long,I don't know if he will address other questions later,which would be sensible given time restraints.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:17 pm

May going for the sly knuckleduster and eye gouging route now. How very prime ministerial of her.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:19 pm

We constructively assist Labour when and if something is wrong and needs putting right, if possible
We're going to have different ideas regarding wrong and if it's a reasonable time to bring it up
I think RogerOThornhill, Willow904 and pk1 have made good points
Mistakes happen and clarification is possible

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Tue 30 May, 2017 2:19 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Ah pk1, no comments on the May v Corbyn from last night, or is it just a quick comment on The Catastrophic radio interview?

It's almost like some people have an agenda, isn't it?