Wednesday 25th October 2017

Post by **refitman** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 7:09 am

Morning all.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 7:46 am

Morning
As previously mentioned.ODD on social care and vote,then supported housing.After PMQ's

Also Select Committee sessions of interest.

https://calendar.parliament.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Guide" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 8:03 am

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/we-need- ... -frsa-fcwr" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We need to talk about supported housing

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 8:04 am

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 17581.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 8:10 am

Sebastian Gorka being given a bully pulpit by the Today Programme this morning .

Horrrible creature.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 8:33 am

frog222 wrote:Sebastian Gorka being given a bully pulpit by the Today Programme this morning .

Horrrible creature.

Who even is he?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 8:45 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
frog222 wrote:Sebastian Gorka being given a bully pulpit by the Today Programme this morning .

Horrrible creature.
Who even is he?

I have now "googled it"

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 9:27 am

The case for mandatory reselection in the 70s and 80s was originally based on fact some MPs are lazy

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opi ... 821765/amp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I do not think there is enough for 650 of them to productively do.

250 would be enough, with a second chamber of similar size.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 10:09 am

SpinningHugo wrote:The case for mandatory reselection in the 70s and 80s was originally based on fact some MPs are lazy

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opi ... 821765/amp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I do not think there is enough for 650 of them to productively do.

250 would be enough, with a second chamber of similar size.

Look we know what you think as it has been the subject of all your latest pathetic posts

It is a simplistic and shit idea if not looked at in context of our whole democratic and elective structure which you don’t even bother mentioning. Just picking random numbers out of the air

I would be happy to debate this with someone who is capable of listening and taking account of other people’s views but you are capable of neither as you have demonstrated plenty of times

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:11 am

Good-morning, everyone

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:16 am

Good morfternoon.

(Striking while the iron's hot.)

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:35 am

Its very simple, there is a case for reducing MP numbers *if* the payroll vote is reduced commensurately.

But we all know that is unlikely to happen, the present government have shown no desire to despite their zeal for axing 50 representatives.

And it can also be argued that several national legislatures are on the small side if anything.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:42 am

Do we or don't we like green eggs with ham?

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:45 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Its very simple, there is a case for reducing MP numbers *if* the payroll vote is reduced commensurately.

But we all know that is unlikely to happen, the present government have shown no desire to despite their zeal for axing 50 representatives.

And it can also be argued that several national legislatures are on the small side if anything.

I think a move to something more akin to the US system is appropriate, with more members of the government drawn from outside Parliament. Should improve the quality of both.

Having someone like O'Mara there is pointless. He is clearly lazy, and any ambitions he may have had are effectively over.

I don't really understand how Labour has ended up with such crap MPs considering the competition for slots. One of my best friends is a Labour councillor. Has stood as a candidate in no hope seats, but never come within a sniff. He is really able and committed, And we still get no marks like O'Mara instead.

My new local Labour MP is dreadful, as was her predecessor. CLPs have no judgement.

If nothing can be done to reform the overall system, what could be done to reform Labour internal?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:48 am

The last GE wasn't a normal one - all parties had to select a large number of candidates at very short notice.

As will doubtless be recalled, Labour went into it expecting few if any gains - unexpected wins are always a potential problem (there were certainly some duds elected in '97)

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:50 am

Credit where it is due however to Labour for suspending O'Mara. Clearly right.

Whatever the apologists of yesterday may think.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:50 am

citizenJA wrote:Do we or don't we like green eggs with ham?

I love Green Eggs and Ham, but not Seuss' most political book. From wiki:

Yertle the Turtle
Yertle the Turtle was published in 1958. There are many connections through the book to the rise and fall of Hitler. The book is about how all creatures should be free.[11]

Ultimately, the dictatorial leader, symbolizing Hitler, falls. The book was removed from many schools for being 'too political.' The quote from the book, "I know, up on top you are seeing great sights, but down here on the bottom, we, too, should have rights"[12] was one of the lines identified as a reason for removal of the book from schools, purportedly to protect the children.[13]

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:54 am

SpinningHugo wrote:Credit where it is due however to Labour for suspending O'Mara. Clearly right.

Whatever the apologists of yesterday may think.

Normal procedure for this sort of thing, nothing more should be read into it really.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:56 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:The last GE wasn't a normal one - all parties had to select a large number of candidates at very short notice.

As will doubtless be recalled, Labour went into it expecting few if any gains - unexpected wins are always a potential problem (there were certainly some duds elected in '97)

I don't think that really explains Sheffield Hallam as the Lib Dems had long been expected to do badly.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 11:58 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Credit where it is due however to Labour for suspending O'Mara. Clearly right.

Whatever the apologists of yesterday may think.
Normal procedure for this sort of thing, nothing more should be read into it really.

Again, that suggests the operation of a machine with no decision making higher up.

That doesn't fit the case either.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:03 pm

I could live without DD's idea of excitement.

If there is a time limit on a negotiation the union stops the clock, it assumes that it’s still at 11:59 until it is concluded, sometimes over the course of 24, 36, 72 hours thereafter and that’s what I imagine it will be.

And it will be a lot of pressure, very high stress, very exciting for everybody watching.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:05 pm

Seema Malhotra gets to the heart of it.

When Labour’s Seema Malhotra asked if this meant that the parliamentary vote on the deal could come after Brexit has taken place, Davis replied:

It could be, yeah. It depends when it concludes.

Malhotra then asked for clarification. So the vote could be after March 2019? Davis replied:

It could be ... It can’t come before we have the deal.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:05 pm

Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Do we or don't we like green eggs with ham?
I love Green Eggs and Ham, but not Seuss' most political book. From wiki:
Yertle the Turtle
Yertle the Turtle was published in 1958. There are many connections through the book to the rise and fall of Hitler. The book is about how all creatures should be free.[11]

Ultimately, the dictatorial leader, symbolizing Hitler, falls. The book was removed from many schools for being 'too political.' The quote from the book, "I know, up on top you are seeing great sights, but down here on the bottom, we, too, should have rights"[12] was one of the lines identified as a reason for removal of the book from schools, purportedly to protect the children.[13]

I love reading banned books

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:14 pm

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

Accepting injustice: the government's approach to Access to Work

https://www.inclusionlondon.org.uk/camp ... programme/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:18 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:The last GE wasn't a normal one - all parties had to select a large number of candidates at very short notice.

As will doubtless be recalled, Labour went into it expecting few if any gains - unexpected wins are always a potential problem (there were certainly some duds elected in '97)
I don't think that really explains Sheffield Hallam as the Lib Dems had long been expected to do badly.

Even leaving aside what the polls were saying when selections were made, the widespread feeling on all sides was that Labour had missed their best chance to win Hallam in 2015.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:19 pm

The government will publish its future model to support and sustain supported housing on Tuesday 31 October 2017.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/supp ... ing-update" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:24 pm

I am not letting this toerag get away with his posts

No-one was an apologist for O'Mara yesterday - some of us just pointed out that this particular gentlemen has an illness which might explain some of his behaviour and any decisions taking regarding him should be taken with that in mind. People with Cerebral Palsy or other such illnesses should be in Parliament but the culture there is hardly condusive to being sure there is a maintenance of the duty of care required by such individuals in cases like this

The comments such as 'he is clearly lazy' are pathetic as much as they are despicable and Hugo seems to be arguing that 'friends of his' would be more suitable

Why would anyone who is disabled want to be an MP when you have Guido and his little underlings such as you doing hiis work for him

O'Mara has to answer for his comments which are completely unacceptable (but are those who are so eagerly critical breathing a huge sigh of relief that some of their comments cannot be found online) but any recrimination has to be done in an even and measured manner

I say it again....you a complete and utter twat (no asterisks this time)

As to the size of Parliaments - we have Hugo asking for 250 MPs (1 for each 250 000 constituents) when we already have quite sparse levels of representation in the UK. If I take Wolverhampton we have a population of around 250000 people so we would have 1 MEP (or a lot less in reality), 1 MP and 60 councillors.

In my village of 1000 we have 40 conseillers communals, we also have a conseilleur cantonal and then some conseillers fédérals.......

The 250000 people represented by 1 MP would leave a lot more people disenfranchised in our hugely centralized democracy - in the US they have large numbers of state and local représentatives because in reality most of the power is delegated to the states and beyond

Reduce the number of MPs but it can only be done with a huge reorganisation of our elective structures to make sure that the people have enough access those with power. I would rather we had fewer MPs but then the power of Westminster would need to be massively reduced and delegated down towards the voter - none of that is suggested by Hugo

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:24 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Do we or don't we like green eggs with ham?
I love Green Eggs and Ham, but not Seuss' most political book. From wiki:
Yertle the Turtle
Yertle the Turtle was published in 1958. There are many connections through the book to the rise and fall of Hitler. The book is about how all creatures should be free.[11]

Ultimately, the dictatorial leader, symbolizing Hitler, falls. The book was removed from many schools for being 'too political.' The quote from the book, "I know, up on top you are seeing great sights, but down here on the bottom, we, too, should have rights"[12] was one of the lines identified as a reason for removal of the book from schools, purportedly to protect the children.[13]
I love reading banned books

I just love reading children's books!

Still not quite sure of the meaning of your original post, unless it was a comment on the persistence of that Sam I am. In which case I agree, he can get tedious when stuck in a theme.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 12:30 pm

https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/go ... down-52929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Government drops LHA cap plans in huge climb down

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 1:03 pm

Imagine the level of stupidity required to apply.If you can,then try to imagine the level of ignorance required to apply to supported housing.Struggling to be honest.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 1:06 pm

There is also, of course, one person here insulting sufferers of cerebral palsy.

It isn't me.

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 1:22 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:There is also, of course, one person here insulting sufferers of cerebral palsy.

It isn't me.

I suggest you read up the symptoms of this illness (of which I am a mild sufferer myself). As a consequence of this I am often clumsy, have a tendency to react impulsively when Under stress and a lack of concentration.

It does not excuse me if I make impulsive comments but at the same time I appreciate it when people who are aware of the condition approach it with that in mind - insuling and dismissive comments calling me lazy, incompetent, useless and other such things are not likely to be particularly helpful

Jared O'Mara has a first class degree and a successful business so it is unlikely he is lazy and useless and it could be that he isn't a very pleasant person based on these comments

It is right that Labour have suspended him for what was written but the 'how' in this case is as important as the 'what'.

This is an emotional subject for me and I probably should not engage with somebody like you who seems to be devoid of any empathy - perhaps I should be cogniscent of that

As I have said before I find your comments at best distasteful....at worst I will not say

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 1:29 pm

Willow904 wrote:---
I just love reading children's books!

Still not quite sure of the meaning of your original post, unless it was a comment on the persistence of that Sam I am. In which case I agree, he can get tedious when stuck in a theme.

My post had no meaning at all
I learned something from your response and I'm grateful, sincerely

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 2:26 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-41726107#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The LHA rates are the maximum amount of benefit that can be paid and when it was introduced they were set at the median average of a sample of rents in a local area.
That meant tenants should have been able to afford half of the private houses in their area.
But the UK government has since changed that.
The principle now is that you should receive housing benefit that enables you to rent any property in the bottom - or cheapest - third of the housing market.

I'm sure others are aware of this, but I missed this change in 2011.

I'm also mystified by the proposed extension to the social housing sector - surely government controls social housing rent prices already?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 3:28 pm

NHS to pilot Airbnb-type scheme for patients recovering from surgery

Plan to pay homeowners to rent spare rooms to ease bed blocking raises alarm about safeguarding, governance and abuse (Guardian)

I think I give up. Didn't there used to be such a thing as NHS convalescent (proper) facilities way back in the mists of time?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... om-surgery

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 3:43 pm

In such a context isn't it so wise to deem necessary rooms for care as spare and chargeable by default and convert minimal housing support for sick/disabled/carers homeowners to an interest bearing loan with charges and propagandise as being selfish and encouraging others to have that view.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 3:45 pm

PorFavor wrote:
NHS to pilot Airbnb-type scheme for patients recovering from surgery

Plan to pay homeowners to rent spare rooms to ease bed blocking raises alarm about safeguarding, governance and abuse (Guardian)
I think I give up. Didn't there used to be such a thing as NHS convalescent (proper) facilities way back in the mists of time?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... om-surgery

Good grief!

Just a room is no different to being sent home, no different at all, so clearly this won't be an Airbnb type of arrangement at all.

If someone is supposed to care for them.....then it is no longer just a room, its a care home and will need to file as a business, pay taxes, employ trained staff on the minimum wage and be inspected by the CQC like all other care homes.

If someone doesn't have family to care for them, then you can't just dump them with any old money grabbing random stranger. At the very least, people would have to go through the same level of vetting as a foster carer. Wouldn't it be easier just to invest in more proper care homes and recuperation beds in local hospitals?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 3:49 pm

Damn I could have made a packet,I could put a bed in the shed and dress Tarquin in a nurses uniform.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 3:58 pm

The larger shed,although could put a small person or child in other but having no windows might breach some elf and safety nonsense.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 4:08 pm

[youtube]wgetd17XTOY[/youtube]
(Fats Domino, R.I.P)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 4:17 pm

Labour wins vote on social care after Tories abstain

This is the third day devoted to opposition motions since the election. And, again, the Tories have refused to vote. The Labour motion on social care has gone through on the nod. (Politics Live, Guardian)

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 4:24 pm

Esther Webber @estwebber
Replying to @estwebber

Keir Starmer: "I don't know on what basis David Davis was saying what he said this morning - I'm struggling to make sense of it"
3:19 PM - Oct 25, 20 (Politics Live, Guardian)

I gave up that (very unequal) struggle ages ago.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 4:45 pm

Sir Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, has also been giving evidence to a committee this afternoon. As the Times’ Deborah Haynes reports, Fallon said that MPs who criticised Saudi Arabia in parliament were putting arms sales at risk.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 4:54 pm

PorFavor wrote:
Labour wins vote on social care after Tories abstain

This is the third day devoted to opposition motions since the election. And, again, the Tories have refused to vote. The Labour motion on social care has gone through on the nod. (Politics Live, Guardian)

Not really remembering the last minority government I've been looking back for a bit of context:

Jim Callaghan’s government suffered 34 defeats in the House of Commons during its three years in office.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... f_Commons_(1945" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;–present)

These were mostly successful amendments (which we're hoping for likewise this time around, in regards to the Brexit withdrawal bill etc, but haven't seen yet) but I did find one which looks like a similar situation to the above:

28 June 1976 - A motion for the House to adjourn following an opposition debate regarding the Child Benefit Scheme was passed by 259-0. The government abstained from the vote after it became clear that many Labour MPs were willing to break the whip to vote for the adjournment.[35]

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 4:56 pm

gilsey wrote:
Sir Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, has also been giving evidence to a committee this afternoon. As the Times’ Deborah Haynes reports, Fallon said that MPs who criticised Saudi Arabia in parliament were putting arms sales at risk.

I don't think he quite gets the fact that jeopardising arms sales is actually seen as a good thing by a lot of people, does he?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 5:11 pm

More particularly, arms sales to THE WORLD'S MAIN EXPORTER OF TERRORISM.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 5:27 pm

https://www.tes.com/news/further-educat ... ng-mp-says" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 6:00 pm

Made Survey lady a cup of tea,but she brought her own tea bag.I didn't charge for the milk or hot water.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 6:08 pm

Not sure what she made of me hopping throughout and wearing my jumper both inside out and wrong way around,but they want a broad perspective.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 25 Oct, 2017 6:09 pm

I hop when a bit nervous some sort of I've got to keep moving.Obviously on the spot your options are limited.

PTO