FlyTheNest

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 7:11 am**

Morning all.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 7:29 am**

Good morfternoon.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 8:22 am**

Morning,
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... an-collini" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Brexit witch-hunt against universities reveals the right’s paranoid thinking"

..Meanwhile, having shown himself so intensely concerned with the teaching of European politics in British universities, I’m sure Mr Heaton-Harris will be delighted to know that his letter to vice-chancellors is on the way to becoming a set text. After all, it has several merits for that purpose: it’s short, representative, revealing, and already exists in multiple copies.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 8:30 am**

@tinybgoat

Trump\Dawn? Me neither. And I have "Googled" it.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 8:30 am**

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

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

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 8:36 am**

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

I see Mr. Jenkins still haunts the old fairground.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 8:43 am**

Almost as blatantly obvious, here come JHB, Michael Fallon and the Sun, dutifully followed by the useless BBC, to defuse the Westminster sex pest story.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 8:53 am**

PorFavor wrote:@tinybgoat

Trump\Dawn? Me neither. And I have "Googled" it.

Nearest I've found is
http://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dawn-kell ... 59134.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
but she changed her surname from Dawn Trump to Dawn Kelly, and no mention of Cheryl.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 9:06 am**

https://www.politico.eu/article/secret- ... eaving-eu/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"My secret plan to turn students against Brexit"

Try as I might to bend the minds of my supposedly vulnerable young charges to my Europhile will, the little blighters simply will insist on thinking for themselves. Honestly, sometimes I don’t know why I bother; I really don’t.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 10:18 am**

There's a possibility that Carles Puigdemont will seek political asylum in Belgium (Sky TV News).

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 10:22 am**

A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work
Aditya Chakrabortty
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... sic-income" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

we have ended up with a system shot through by two toxic beliefs.

One, that poverty is the product of personal moral failure. For the former chancellor George Osborne, it was about skivers v strivers. For IDS, poverty was the rotten fruit of broken families, addiction or debt. Neither man, nor the rest of their party, can accept what their rightwing counterparts in Finland do: that poverty is no more than a lack of money.

Well said.

I'm not sure I'm convinced about it working 'for everyone' but I certainly think the Finnish experiment is commendable.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 10:26 am**

http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2017/1 ... ty-courts/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The state of the County Courts

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 11:32 am**

PorFavor wrote:There's a possibility that Carles Puigdemont will seek political asylum in Belgium (Sky TV News).

Some wag has suggested Scotland

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 11:38 am**

Simplest cases,claims of success reminds of something else.The "lack of money",schtick totally ignores the structural/situational barriers that no amount of money can overcome on an individual basis.Quite clear to me why the Right would be attracted.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 11:39 am**

gilsey wrote:A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work
Aditya Chakrabortty
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... sic-income" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
we have ended up with a system shot through by two toxic beliefs.

One, that poverty is the product of personal moral failure. For the former chancellor George Osborne, it was about skivers v strivers. For IDS, poverty was the rotten fruit of broken families, addiction or debt. Neither man, nor the rest of their party, can accept what their rightwing counterparts in Finland do: that poverty is no more than a lack of money.
Well said.

I'm not sure I'm convinced about it working 'for everyone' but I certainly think the Finnish experiment is commendable.

Yes, this is certainly well worth watching.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 11:56 am**

Brexit deal will only be legal after a vote of MPs

https://t.co/sHF9uyNUbL" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 11:58 am**

I'm an old fart,I actually think account of contributions(in broad terms and reconfigured)and State reciprocity is worth preserving,especially when it is increasingly getting shredded.This smacks of an individualised reverse,have some dosh regardless,to me,great to those that have choice,increasingly not on a continuum IMHO,at best "service" and less choice.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 12:02 pm**

citizenJA wrote:Brexit deal will only be legal after a vote of MPs

https://t.co/sHF9uyNUbL" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Drip by drip, they are having to recognise reality.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 12:03 pm**

HindleA wrote:I'm an old fart,I actually think account of contributions(in broad terms and reconfigured)and State reciprocity is worth preserving,especially when it is increasingly getting shredded.This smacks of an individualised reverse,have some dosh regardless,to me,great to those that have choice,increasingly not on a continuum IMHO,at best "service" and less choice.

It won't be worth it if a Universal Income is used as an excuse to dismantle public services

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 12:12 pm**

I'm out of whack with some if not many.Ironically and counter intuitively I cannot see if generally applied,rather than emancipatory,increased contingency,removing of choice at best,fundamentally different situations have to be treated fundamentally differently."Universal"is a double edged sword.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 12:17 pm**

citizenJA wrote:
HindleA wrote:I'm an old fart,I actually think account of contributions(in broad terms and reconfigured)and State reciprocity is worth preserving,especially when it is increasingly getting shredded.This smacks of an individualised reverse,have some dosh regardless,to me,great to those that have choice,increasingly not on a continuum IMHO,at best "service" and less choice.
It won't be worth it if a Universal Income is used as an excuse to dismantle public services

And this is why some of us are wary of fully embracing the idea. But done right, it also has the potential to be an extremely good thing - hence the interest in Finland.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 12:36 pm**

http://www.24housing.co.uk/news/labour- ... ng-policy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour call for ‘cross party’ housing policy

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 12:45 pm**

HindleA wrote:I'm out of whack with some if not many.Ironically and counter intuitively I cannot see if generally applied,rather than emancipatory,increased contingency,removing of choice at best,fundamentally different situations have to be treated fundamentally differently."Universal"is a double edged sword.

You've been instrumental in changing my mind about UBI, which I used to view far more favourably than I do now.

Saving unemployed/underemployed people from having to engage with the ridiculous conditionality would be a great thing though.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 1:32 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
PorFavor wrote:There's a possibility that Carles Puigdemont will seek political asylum in Belgium (Sky TV News).
Some wag has suggested Scotland

He's merely exercising his right to the freedom of movement within the EU!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 29216.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Meanwhile, the SNP continue to alienate Spain - a country which could make an independent Scotland's entry to the EU very difficult.

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/n ... -1-4598570" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 2:18 pm**

Saw Death of Stalin last night. Very good, recommend it highly.

This Iannucci interview very good, especially from 8.15 onwards

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

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 2:19 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
gilsey wrote:A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work
Aditya Chakrabortty
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... sic-income" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
we have ended up with a system shot through by two toxic beliefs.

One, that poverty is the product of personal moral failure. For the former chancellor George Osborne, it was about skivers v strivers. For IDS, poverty was the rotten fruit of broken families, addiction or debt. Neither man, nor the rest of their party, can accept what their rightwing counterparts in Finland do: that poverty is no more than a lack of money.
Well said.

I'm not sure I'm convinced about it working 'for everyone' but I certainly think the Finnish experiment is commendable.
Yes, this is certainly well worth watching.

It is a non-starter when you look at the figures. Lovely idea of course.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 3:43 pm**

Damien Green
Andrew Mitchell
Stephen Crabb
Matt Hancock
Boris Johnson
Mark Garnier
Michael Fallon
George Hollingberry
Nigel Adams
Conor Burns
Charlie Ephicke
Nigel Evans
Guy Opperman
Jake Berry
Justin Tomlinson
Bob Stewart
Chris Heaton-Harris

Chris Procter
Michael Fabricant
Michael Ellis
Robert Halfon
John Whittingdale
Liz Truss
Daniel Kawcynski
John Hayes
Liam Fox
Alan M???
Claire Perry
Chris Skidmore
Rory Stewart
Steve Double
Will Wragg
Dom Raab
Grant Shapps

Nicholas Soames
Mark Menzies
Amber Rudd
Alun Cairns

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 3:43 pm**

With apologies for typos and misspellings

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 3:48 pm**

And there are some slightly different variants circulating. I decided not to include the "indiscretions".

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 4:12 pm**

Three female MPs on "the list", I see.......

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 4:17 pm**

I place no store in that list, and I think it is a silly thing to post.

It includes, say, Amber Rudd for being in a relationship with Kwasi Kwarteng, which as far as I am aware isn't immoral, unless we're supposed to be in the business of condemning relationships outside of wedlock.

It isn't very helpful, as it lumps together some pretty serious allegations, with things that are both public knowledge and not immoral on any view.

I've no doubt that some MPs have done some horrible things. That just doesn't have much to do with some of the names on that list.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 4:21 pm**

I am aware that "the list" lumps very innocuous consensual stuff together with things that, if true, the perpetrators deserve banging up for.

But sooner or later the latter group are going to be "outed" fully - its only a matter of time.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 4:24 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I am aware that "the list" lumps very innocuous consensual stuff together with things that, if true, the perpetrators deserve banging up for.

But sooner or later the latter group are going to be "outed" fully - its only a matter of time.

I fully approve of outing people who have committed serious wrongdoing.

I don't approve at all of lumping them in with people who've done nothing at all, and sniggering over it. Juvenile.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 4:25 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Three female MPs on "the list", I see.......

And you've checked out what their accused of?

I don't approve of this list of names, and think it is probably defamatory by association.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 4:40 pm**

No, I haven't seen the details - just mentioning because some might be surprised the list isn't all male.

There is at least one Tory woman MP not cited that I have heard "interesting" things about. Let's just leave it there.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 4:59 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:No, I haven't seen the details - just mentioning because some might be surprised the list isn't all male.

There is at least one Tory woman MP not cited that I have heard "interesting" things about. Let's just leave it there.

It is only"surprising" if you thought, as is suggested by the claim that those guilty of "indiscretions" have been removed, that this is a list of those accused of sexual harrasment. It isn't.

That list includes people who have been accused of nothing more than having consensual sexual relations with other people. It isn't "surprising" at all.

I suppose some people, presumably Paul, think that because they're Tories they're just fair game. Nobody, I hope, would consider posting a list like that with the names of say sports celebrities, some accused of serious wrongdoing others of nothing but not being married to the person they have sex with.

I don't agree. There are good and sufficient reasons, not just legal, for not posting lists like that. That they're Tories might justify it in the heads of some, but I'd suggest you're wrong.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:03 pm**

No juvenile is discounting as irrelevant and then giving further information because you didn't get there first.I had no idea about Amber Rudd,and as far as I am concerned reaction to that information is more emetic than sniggering.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:03 pm**

I think you are reading a bit much into PfY's motivations there, he just reproduced a list that has been posted elsewhere.

Everybody is well aware now that not everyone listed is suspected of serious sexual misconduct.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:05 pm**

Amol Rajan‏Verified account @amolrajanBBC 50m50 minutes ago
More
.@BBCNewsnight Editor @iankatz1000 has confirmed in an email to staff that he’s leaving. Heading to @Channel4.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:10 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I think you are reading a bit much into PfY's motivations there, he just reproduced a list that has been posted elsewhere.

Everybody is well aware now that not everyone listed is suspected of serious sexual misconduct.

That you're repeating something somebody else has already said is no excuse at all.

As for Paul's motives, I don't know and make no claim about them.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:17 pm**

The actual evidence is against you,in that regard and clear to see.You are in essence,a bully.People have their own sensitivities which you compute and attempt to use against.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:29 pm**

https://labourlist.org/2017/10/the-targ ... is-autumn/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is the updated list of target seats where Labour has opened selection contests

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:32 pm**

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

Consultation outcome
Funding for supported housing

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

Open consultation
Funding for supported housing - two consultations

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:35 pm**

SpinningHugo wrote:I place no store in that list, and I think it is a silly thing to post.

It includes, say, Amber Rudd for being in a relationship with Kwasi Kwarteng, which as far as I am aware isn't immoral, unless we're supposed to be in the business of condemning relationships outside of wedlock.

It isn't very helpful, as it lumps together some pretty serious allegations, with things that are both public knowledge and not immoral on any view.

I've no doubt that some MPs have done some horrible things. That just doesn't have much to do with some of the names on that list.

It's a list that is being widely circulated in the news.

We can discuss it and I don't need your approval to post anything thank you.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:37 pm**

SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I think you are reading a bit much into PfY's motivations there, he just reproduced a list that has been posted elsewhere.

Everybody is well aware now that not everyone listed is suspected of serious sexual misconduct.
That you're repeating something somebody else has already said is no excuse at all.

As for Paul's motives, I don't know and make no claim about them.

Well don't tell me my post is "silly" then.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:38 pm**

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I think you are reading a bit much into PfY's motivations there, he just reproduced a list that has been posted elsewhere.

Everybody is well aware now that not everyone listed is suspected of serious sexual misconduct.

Exactly. I passed no judgement on anyone on the list. It's of interest.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:41 pm**

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I think you are reading a bit much into PfY's motivations there, he just reproduced a list that has been posted elsewhere.

Everybody is well aware now that not everyone listed is suspected of serious sexual misconduct.
Exactly. I passed no judgement on anyone on the list. It's of interest.

That'll be the explanation for the laughing emojis I expect.

A dispassionate passing on of information.

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:43 pm**

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

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 5:56 pm**

SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I think you are reading a bit much into PfY's motivations there, he just reproduced a list that has been posted elsewhere.

Everybody is well aware now that not everyone listed is suspected of serious sexual misconduct.
Exactly. I passed no judgement on anyone on the list. It's of interest.
That'll be the explanation for the laughing emojis I expect.

A dispassionate passing on of information.

Grant Shapps has long been an object of certain ridicule on here, it's fair to say. Hence the emojis.

Heaton-Harris was a minor personal Schadenfreude from me because I work at a University and he sent that rather troubling letter round just last week.

I don't need to justify myself to you btw, but thought fellow posters might enjoy the explanation.

Now leave it please. Anatoly has also asked you to leave it.

Next?

Posted: **Tue 31 Oct, 2017 6:09 pm**

So it was gleeful gloating about the Tories you specifically dislike, but just passing on information about the rest?

Of course you're not answerable to me. I'm certainly not suggesting you are.

FlyTheNest

Tuesday 31st October 2017

Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017

Re: Tuesday 31st October 2017