FlyTheNest

A haven
It is currently Wed 19 Sep, 2018 10:46 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 101 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Friday 12th January 2018
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 7:12 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:22 pm
Posts: 3254
Location: Wombwell, United Kingdom
Has thanked: 879 times
Been thanked: 5850 times
Morning all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:18 am 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
Quote:
Curious isn't it? We who wish to be European and part of something larger than petty national concerns now have Nigel Farage speaking for us more than Jeremy Corbyn.

In their desperation to keep hold of one vote base I fear Labour are losing another. I certainly won't vote for them again if they keep up this malarkey. And I'm exactly the kind of person they attracted last time.

I understand they have a difficult balancing act to maintain but it seems to me Corbyn is ignoring the wishes of most of his members and 50% of the electorate, the remain half who overwhelmingly voted Labour, in order to appease his voters in places like Hartlepool.

I have no answer to this conondrum Labour is faced with, all I can say is if Corbyn carries on like this many like me will not vote Labour at the next general election.

And all I can see is vacillating and Keir Starmer doing the best he can with what he's got to work with.


Good morning

I would like to just come back to this post from last night

I think those that voted Remain at the Referendum have to be careful in not falling into the trap of the Leave camp by assuming they know how everyone else who voted as them is one block and can be taken as agreeing on one way forward

On the second referendum, Farage in no way speaks for me and saying he is doing so more than Corbyn is not Something I believe at all. If it is your view then fine but can you be careful in using the word 'we'

I set out yesterday some of my concerns regarding a second referendum and I think it is beholden on people who make such comments (ie to go as far as lauding Farage, as some have) to explain to us skeptics when we should have this referendum and how the questions will be framed. The risk is that a second referendum does more damage than good to the cause of those of us who want to stay close to Europe.

I respect anyone's right to vote for who they want but I would caution those who do want to use their vote in this way to look at their seat. FPTP is a brutal system so if you are in a LD/Labour marginal then perhaps it makes sense to use your vote as you suggest if you feel so strongly. Same in a LD/Tory marginal. Doing so in a Labour/Tory marginal though would be counter-productive and just lead to a Tory Government

We also have to be careful in assuming Brexit is driving everything - we have said many times that it is not the fault of the EU that so many people are disaffected at the moment - that is in the main due to Tory policies and so if we do by some chance turn back Brexit.....the situation will not get any better unless we also look to overturn the Tory legacy.

I am totally behind what Corbyn is doing on opposing Tory policies that are causing acute damage now, rather than making everything about Brexit - it is a question of whether it is floating voters focused on one main Policy should be his whole preoccupation or people like me who want to see things change much further

So, if I was to ask a question to those agreeing with Farage that could possibly start some interesting discussions - 'what questions should a second referendum ask, when should we have it and what would be the conséquences of different results?'.

My current position is the last referendum was a simple binary choice on a simple question, hiding a multitude of sins. I think any future vote would be much more clear on the detail but not be distilled easily into a simple binary question.

Edited to add:

I am truly Remain - I want to overturn the decision completely. I woukld not be in favour of staying in the CU/SM with no say on the rules - firstly, because it is really us handing over a significant amount of our sovereignty to the EU and secondly because a consequence of that would mean that the deal was unstable and would collapse. How many people though would back me up on that? And will that even be an option? How would I viote if that was the choice? Not easy......Norway would be slightly easier to accept but then outside the EU would cause issues on the Irish border


Last edited by howsillyofme1 on Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:29 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
As I've said before, while we will never know, it seems most likely to me that the 52:48 split in the referendum was not 52 Hard Brexit : 48 Hard Remain

Most likely, the majority of voters were errr Leave-ish or errr Remain-ish

There are those like Farage who will always try and polarise this, but the productive way forward is somewhere in that middle ground IMHO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:37 am 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1960
Has thanked: 13166 times
Been thanked: 3978 times
This was interesting, by Martin Kettle
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... t-fighting
"On Europe, Labour was right to be cautious. No longer"
Not sure the title of the piece really fits, but he's good of Farage:
Quote:
There is a strong case for a second referendum on the terms. But Farage is not a party leader or even an MP. Now, as before, he is a weapon deployed by media and business interests against parliamentary democracy. To obsess about a second referendum is to put the cart before the horse. The decision on whether to have a second poll depends on the terms. Those have not yet been agreed. The central issue for the next eight or nine months is what they should be. The referendum’s time will come.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:39 am 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
As I've said before, while we will never know, it seems most likely to me that the 52:48 split in the referendum was not 52 Hard Brexit : 48 Hard Remain

Most likely, the majority of voters were errr Leave-ish or errr Remain-ish

There are those like Farage who will always try and polarise this, but the productive way forward is somewhere in that middle ground IMHO.



I concur with this Paul...the question is how do we actually do this in a country where the politics tends to push us into binary options and we do not seem to be good with ambiguity - look at the demands for Corbyn to 'come off the fence' when the fence may well be the right place to be

The error was the referendum in the first place but the political classes do not want to own up to that in the main as they were all compliant with it and all been proponents of one at some time or another (the SNP voted against though so have some grounds or crowing).

I will keep saying it though....the number one culprit is the guy that is hardly mentioned now, Cameron, and his sidekick at the Standard now trying to pretend it was nothing to do with him. I have seen some 'Remainers' though happy to forgive him and see him as a potential friend in this new 'centrist party' that keeps coming up - that to me is unforgiveable as it is his fault we are where we are - in this case, no rehabilitation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:43 am 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
tinybgoat wrote:
This was interesting, by Martin Kettle
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... t-fighting
"On Europe, Labour was right to be cautious. No longer"
Not sure the title of the piece really fits, but he's good of Farage:
Quote:
There is a strong case for a second referendum on the terms. But Farage is not a party leader or even an MP. Now, as before, he is a weapon deployed by media and business interests against parliamentary democracy. To obsess about a second referendum is to put the cart before the horse. The decision on whether to have a second poll depends on the terms. Those have not yet been agreed. The central issue for the next eight or nine months is what they should be. The referendum’s time will come.



I think we are not far off the time when Labour should become bolder.....not now though....let us get to March and the start of the next negot6iations which will possibly go rapidly downhill for the Government as I think their position is incoherent

I am still not convinced that a second referendum will be a good idea in any circumstance but i am open-minded as it will depend on the deal and the questions and there are much cleverer and subtle people than me


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:43 am 
Offline
Committee Member

Joined: Fri 01 Jul, 2016 2:40 pm
Posts: 143
Has thanked: 870 times
Been thanked: 421 times
But there is no middle ground.

With the yes or no vote - once you've committed your vote you are either hard brexit or hard remain.

The 'not bothered ' are the third who didn't vote at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:54 am 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
Lost Soul wrote:
But there is no middle ground.

With the yes or no vote - once you've committed your vote you are either hard brexit or hard remain.

The 'not bothered ' are the third who didn't vote at all.



I don't agree that there is no 'middle ground' - there is in how people are - not everyone who voted Leave is a Hard Brexiter, and not anyone who voted main is a EU fanatic - the binary question simplified it to that but Paul is probably right that most people are oscillating around the middle somewhere and not a few were persuaded by the fibs of the Leave camp and the media

I think an issue for the pro EU side is that there are probably more people committed to leave than are fanatical supporters of the EU. I have met plenty of people who desopise the EU with a passion but never really met anyone so pro EU that is consumes them. I could not see a pro-EU equivalent of UKIP having much success at the ballot box, for example.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 9:58 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
Lost Soul wrote:
But there is no middle ground.

With the yes or no vote - once you've committed your vote you are either hard brexit or hard remain.

The 'not bothered ' are the third who didn't vote at all.

I do see what you mean, but neighbours I talked to at the time felt they should vote, because you should, but were massively undecided.

Their votes are just as precious as those of folk like me who were 100% sure from the day the sodding thing was called.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:02 am 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1960
Has thanked: 13166 times
Been thanked: 3978 times
howsillyofme1 wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:
This was interesting, by Martin Kettle
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... t-fighting
"On Europe, Labour was right to be cautious. No longer"
Not sure the title of the piece really fits, but he's good of Farage:
Quote:
There is a strong case for a second referendum on the terms. But Farage is not a party leader or even an MP. Now, as before, he is a weapon deployed by media and business interests against parliamentary democracy. To obsess about a second referendum is to put the cart before the horse. The decision on whether to have a second poll depends on the terms. Those have not yet been agreed. The central issue for the next eight or nine months is what they should be. The referendum’s time will come.



I think we are not far off the time when Labour should become bolder.....not now though....let us get to March and the start of the next negot6iations which will possibly go rapidly downhill for the Government as I think their position is incoherent

I am still not convinced that a second referendum will be a good idea in any circumstance but i am open-minded as it will depend on the deal and the questions and there are much cleverer and subtle people than me


I agree (but abstain on the much cleverer and subtle, bit)
but maybe Labour could be doing more to question what type of trade deals would be available post Brexit & whether they match up to the 'leave' promises.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:13 am 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
Quote:
I agree (but abstain on the much cleverer and subtle, bit)
but maybe Labour could be doing more to question what type of trade deals would be available post Brexit & whether they match up to the 'leave' promises



Possibly they could - and to be fair they are a bit. The difficulty is that the media (abetted by some who should know better) are screaming for Labour to say more but actually they are not interested unless it can be spun as controversial. Starmer can point out the inconsistencies and nonsense the Government's position is as much as he likes but a Labour amendment on the CU can be spun as a 'split' or 'rebellion' and is of far more interest

I am a bit of a political nerd so go looking for things but how many people calling for more from Labour are actually dépendent on the mainstream media to get that information - and do you think this area of the media is neutral and fair in their coverage of Brexit, and of Labour in general?

The issues around Brexit are complex as we move into what the deals will look like and someone like Starmer is clever enough to understand this and so does not simplify it to a point that goes into a meaningless soundbite or pretend the answers are easy. Davis though is a classic example of the Dunning-Kruger effect so he can sound blasé and confident about things


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:16 am 
Online
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4978
Has thanked: 10250 times
Been thanked: 12211 times
Yet another fire:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... large-fire

Quote:
Nottingham train station evacuated after large fire


Firefighters warned of this some years ago. As all the fire prevention work they were doing behind the scenes helped to stop fires happening in the first place they warned that politicians may be tempted to believe we didn't need as many firemen anymore. But of course, with fewer firemen doing fire prevention work, fewer fires are prevented before they happen and we start getting more full-on blazes with fewer firefighters and resources to tackle them.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:19 am 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
Willow904 wrote:
Yet another fire:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... large-fire

Quote:
Nottingham train station evacuated after large fire


Firefighters warned of this some years ago. As all the fire prevention work they were doing behind the scenes helped to stop fires happening in the first place they warned that politicians may be tempted to believe we didn't need as many firemen anymore. But of course, with fewer firemen doing fire prevention work, fewer fires are prevented before they happen and we start getting more full-on blazes with fewer firefighters and resources to tackle them.


There do seem to be a lot at the moment don't there.....not sure if there is an underlying cause but it is clear when resource is tight then the tendency is to focus on reactive rather than proactive - we also tend to value the fire response activities (as an example) than the fire prevention part.........


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:21 am 
Offline
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 9:51 am
Posts: 2468
Has thanked: 5561 times
Been thanked: 5763 times
According to Joe Anderson the fire in the Liverpool car park would have been controlled much earlier in previous years, with more resources.
He is partisan, of course, but still probably right.

_________________
One world, like it or not - John Martyn


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:31 am 
Offline
Speaker of the House

Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 9:51 am
Posts: 2468
Has thanked: 5561 times
Been thanked: 5763 times
Interesting piece on Finland's unconditional unemployment benefit experiment, it will be good to see some actual data when it's finished.
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/ ... to-be-true

_________________
One world, like it or not - John Martyn


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:42 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
gilsey wrote:
According to Joe Anderson the fire in the Liverpool car park would have been controlled much earlier in previous years, with more resources.
He is partisan, of course, but still probably right.

It's probably really hard to say that any given fire would or wouldn't have happened isn't it?

But overall, if we have less well resourced services and less "red tape" more people and property will be harmed. What's really sickening is when the Mail readers then complain about it! :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:46 am 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 10361
Has thanked: 20318 times
Been thanked: 18330 times
Good morfternoon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:50 am 
Online
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4978
Has thanked: 10250 times
Been thanked: 12211 times
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/business ... e-14139227

Quote:
Ministers from across the Government met last night to discuss the plight of construction services company Carillion amid fears it is close to collapse, it has been reported.

Cabinet Office minister David Lidington hosted the summit of senior figures including Business Secretary Greg Clark and Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liz Truss.


Hospitals, roads, HS2 - Carillion has so many fingers in so many pies. You could almost say it's too big to fail. A bailout, of pensions at the very least, seems inevitable. Cameron used the financial crash as cover to pursue an ideological policy to shrink the state. The real causes were still out there, though. EU action has forced some issues to be addressed re the banks, but a lot of what could and should have been done post financial crash simply hasn't. Predatory capitalism Ed Miliband called it. Others call it wealth extraction. The countries that resist the most enjoy the most equality and better living standards. The Tories, far from resisting, actually encourage it. And while the private sector runs away with all the cash, the Tory politicians are left with the job of selling this daylight robbery to the electorate. I'll be interested to see how they pin this latest global corporate failure (Carillon is very much a global company) on Labour.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:53 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ent-labour

carillion-crisis-recall-contracts-public-control-uk-government-labour


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:56 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
A nice BTL comment

"Carillion up the Khyber" :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 11:16 am 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7887
Has thanked: 788 times
Been thanked: 16833 times
Good discussion this morning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 11:45 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Good discussion this morning.

Well there was until you arrived ;-)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 11:47 am 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7887
Has thanked: 788 times
Been thanked: 16833 times
Lost Soul wrote:
But there is no middle ground.

With the yes or no vote - once you've committed your vote you are either hard brexit or hard remain.

The 'not bothered ' are the third who didn't vote at all.


You see, this is what I really disagree with. I don't think that's the right way of reading public opinion.

It is, however, a major reason why referendums are generally bad and should be avoided as much as possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 11:50 am 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 7283
Has thanked: 4438 times
Been thanked: 16894 times
Once upon a time the Conservative Party used to have Foreign Secretaries that knew how to act the part on the world stage and not come out with embarrassing guff like this.

Quote:
Boris Johnson‏Verified account
@BorisJohnson
Follow Follow @BorisJohnson
More
The US is the biggest single investor in the UK - yet Khan & Corbyn seem determined to put this crucial relationship at risk. We will not allow US-UK relations to be endangered by some puffed up pompous popinjay in City Hall.


:toss:

_________________
FTN's supplier of tedious, pedantic education policy waffle; and Pedant-in-Chief generally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:01 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
RogerOThornhill wrote:
Once upon a time the Conservative Party used to have Foreign Secretaries that knew how to act the part on the world stage and not come out with embarrassing guff like this.

Quote:
Boris Johnson‏Verified account
@BorisJohnson
Follow Follow @BorisJohnson
More
The US is the biggest single investor in the UK - yet Khan & Corbyn seem determined to put this crucial relationship at risk. We will not allow US-UK relations to be endangered by some puffed up pompous popinjay in City Hall.


:toss:

Was there ever a more puffed up, pompous popinjay in City Hall than Johnson himself?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:09 pm 
Online
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4978
Has thanked: 10250 times
Been thanked: 12211 times
Quote:
Adam Bienkov
@AdamBienkov
·
14m
Boris Johnson, who once accused the former US president of having a "part-Kenyan... ancestral dislike" for the UK and called the former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton a "sadistic nurse", accuses Sadiq Khan of damaging US-UK relations.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:10 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 10361
Has thanked: 20318 times
Been thanked: 18330 times
Carillion has administrators (EY) "on standby". (Sky TV news)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:13 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
Looking at Carillion parochially - Wolverhampton cannot afford to lose 400 good jobs

How did it get to this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:19 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 7283
Has thanked: 4438 times
Been thanked: 16894 times
Well.

John Worboys: 'No plans' to review rape cases

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42662297

Quote:
Almost 100 unprosecuted cases against sex attacker John Worboys will not be reviewed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), it has emerged.

Lawyers representing Worboys' victims asked the CPS to review the 93 cases that the 60-year-old rapist was not prosecuted over.

One of his victims said it would be a "total scandal" if the additional cases were not reviewed.

The CPS said it had no plans to review its decision-making.


I imagine all of those who hurled unfounded and uninformed accusations in Starmer's direction will be quick to say "Oh, yeah, looks like I was wrong. Sorry"...they will won't they?

_________________
FTN's supplier of tedious, pedantic education policy waffle; and Pedant-in-Chief generally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:22 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 7283
Has thanked: 4438 times
Been thanked: 16894 times
How to Win Friends and Influence People: An Updated Edition by Donald Trump

https://twitter.com/SanamF24/status/951787538146058240

_________________
FTN's supplier of tedious, pedantic education policy waffle; and Pedant-in-Chief generally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:23 pm 
Offline
First Secretary of State

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 10:34 am
Posts: 3211
Has thanked: 860 times
Been thanked: 5547 times
RogerOThornhill wrote:
Well.

John Worboys: 'No plans' to review rape cases

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42662297

Quote:
Almost 100 unprosecuted cases against sex attacker John Worboys will not be reviewed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), it has emerged.

Lawyers representing Worboys' victims asked the CPS to review the 93 cases that the 60-year-old rapist was not prosecuted over.

One of his victims said it would be a "total scandal" if the additional cases were not reviewed.

The CPS said it had no plans to review its decision-making.


I imagine all of those who hurled unfounded and uninformed accusations in Starmer's direction will be quick to say "Oh, yeah, looks like I was wrong. Sorry"...they will won't they?


We could start by someone who made that accusation on here perhaps? :)

In fact first out of the blocks to get it out there........and a a lawyer as well


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:28 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 7283
Has thanked: 4438 times
Been thanked: 16894 times
I'm struggling to see what 'in a political capacity' could possibly mean when applied to someone who is like y'know, the actual Foreign Secretary.

Image

_________________
FTN's supplier of tedious, pedantic education policy waffle; and Pedant-in-Chief generally.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:34 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
RogerOThornhill wrote:
I'm struggling to see what 'in a political capacity' could possibly mean when applied to someone who is like y'know, the actual Foreign Secretary.

Image

I couldn't understand that either.

Is it a joke?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:36 pm 
Online
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4978
Has thanked: 10250 times
Been thanked: 12211 times
howsillyofme1 wrote:
Looking at Carillion parochially - Wolverhampton cannot afford to lose 400 good jobs

How did it get to this?


One of the first things the Coalition did in 2010 was cancel or postpone a large amount of planned infrastructure investment and spending. Much of the early lauded deficit reduction came from reducing capital investment rather than the day to day spending the government insisted could be reduced by slashing "Labour waste". It strikes me that ongoing austerity has had quite an impact on Carillion's outlook. Although Carillon is still winning several school building contracts, for instance, are there as many as there were under Labour's Building Schools for the Future programme? Just a thought. I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons connected to management decisions, rapid expansion into too diverse interests etc. But I bet austerity has played some part. Making profit by building things with public money isn't usually something the private sector is rubbish at.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:39 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 10361
Has thanked: 20318 times
Been thanked: 18330 times
Willow904 wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:
Looking at Carillion parochially - Wolverhampton cannot afford to lose 400 good jobs

How did it get to this?


One of the first things the Coalition did in 2010 was cancel or postpone a large amount of planned infrastructure investment and spending. Much of the early lauded deficit reduction came from reducing capital investment rather than the day to day spending the government insisted could be reduced by slashing "Labour waste". It strikes me that ongoing austerity has had quite an impact on Carillion's outlook. Although Carillon is still winning several school building contracts, for instance, are there as many as there were under Labour's Building Schools for the Future programme? Just a thought. I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons connected to management decisions, rapid expansion into too diverse interests etc. But I bet austerity has played some part. Making profit by building things with public money isn't usually something the private sector is rubbish at.


Or, to put it another way, the private company, Carillion, is dependent on tax-payer funding for its survival. (Not that I'm defending austerity.)


Last edited by PorFavor on Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:41 pm 
Offline
Committee Member

Joined: Fri 01 Jul, 2016 2:40 pm
Posts: 143
Has thanked: 870 times
Been thanked: 421 times
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Lost Soul wrote:
But there is no middle ground.

With the yes or no vote - once you've committed your vote you are either hard brexit or hard remain.

The 'not bothered ' are the third who didn't vote at all.


You see, this is what I really disagree with. I don't think that's the right way of reading public opinion.

It is, however, a major reason why referendums are generally bad and should be avoided as much as possible.


Well, that's where we agree.

It's not the way to read public opinion. it is a way of obtaining a result which can then be used to say ' The public have given us a mandate to ( insert whatever you like here )...'
So while your vote is yours until it is cast. It then becomes a statistic to be used - not necessarily in the way you'd intended.

I'm not saying the voter becomes hard brexit or remain - but the resulting statistics are effectively counted as such. Your vote, while precious to you ( maybe ) before it is cast, then becomes valuable fuel and then can be manipulated to mean something that you never intended it to mean.


Last edited by Lost Soul on Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:42 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 10361
Has thanked: 20318 times
Been thanked: 18330 times
Edited my last post to add a comma.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:54 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7887
Has thanked: 788 times
Been thanked: 16833 times
RogerOThornhill wrote:
Once upon a time the Conservative Party used to have Foreign Secretaries that knew how to act the part on the world stage and not come out with embarrassing guff like this.

Quote:
Boris Johnson‏Verified account
@BorisJohnson
Follow Follow @BorisJohnson
More
The US is the biggest single investor in the UK - yet Khan & Corbyn seem determined to put this crucial relationship at risk. We will not allow US-UK relations to be endangered by some puffed up pompous popinjay in City Hall.


:toss:


I mean, even most TORIES don't like Trump. Who exactly does he think he is impressing with this?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 12:56 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 6095
Has thanked: 2109 times
Been thanked: 10062 times
Lost Soul wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Lost Soul wrote:
But there is no middle ground.

With the yes or no vote - once you've committed your vote you are either hard brexit or hard remain.

The 'not bothered ' are the third who didn't vote at all.


You see, this is what I really disagree with. I don't think that's the right way of reading public opinion.

It is, however, a major reason why referendums are generally bad and should be avoided as much as possible.


Well, that's where we agree.

It's not the way to read public opinion. it is a way of obtaining a result which can then be used to say ' The public have given us a mandate to ( insert whatever you like here )...'
So while your vote is yours until it is cast. It then becomes a statistic to be used - not necessarily in the way you'd intended.

I'm not saying the voter becomes hard brexit or remain - but the resulting statistics are effectively counted as such. Your vote, while precious to you ( maybe ) before it is cast, then becomes valuable fuel and then can be manipulated to mean something that you never intended it to mean.

Yes. We have a representative democracy. Use a referendum when a significant change to that system is proposed. Otherwise not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 1:04 pm 
Online
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4978
Has thanked: 10250 times
Been thanked: 12211 times
PorFavor wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
howsillyofme1 wrote:
Looking at Carillion parochially - Wolverhampton cannot afford to lose 400 good jobs

How did it get to this?


One of the first things the Coalition did in 2010 was cancel or postpone a large amount of planned infrastructure investment and spending. Much of the early lauded deficit reduction came from reducing capital investment rather than the day to day spending the government insisted could be reduced by slashing "Labour waste". It strikes me that ongoing austerity has had quite an impact on Carillion's outlook. Although Carillon is still winning several school building contracts, for instance, are there as many as there were under Labour's Building Schools for the Future programme? Just a thought. I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons connected to management decisions, rapid expansion into too diverse interests etc. But I bet austerity has played some part. Making profit by building things with public money isn't usually something the private sector is rubbish at.


Or, to put it another way, the private company, Carillion, is dependent on tax-payer funding for its survival. (Not that I'm defending austerity.)


Absolutely. And they won't be the only one. Serco, G4S, Capita, Atos.

http://www.cityam.com/270527/uk-spends- ... rocurement
Quote:
The UK spends more than the rest of the EU combined on pricey procurement contracts


The UK doesn't actually outsource much more public services to the private sector than Germany, as far as I can tell, but the UK had 167 contracts worth more than 100m euros in 2015 compared to Germany's 5 according to the above article, which I think is very relevant to Carillion and some of the points I've been trying to grapple with today.

In other words, there's more than one kind of private outsourcing of public services, so even if you accept a place for the private sector in providing public services, you should still be very concerned about the kinds of risks posed to both the taxpayer and the private companies by our apparent over reliance on big contracts to a relatively few private suppliers. If that makes any sense.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 1:05 pm 
Online
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4978
Has thanked: 10250 times
Been thanked: 12211 times
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
Once upon a time the Conservative Party used to have Foreign Secretaries that knew how to act the part on the world stage and not come out with embarrassing guff like this.

Quote:
Boris Johnson‏Verified account
@BorisJohnson
Follow Follow @BorisJohnson
More
The US is the biggest single investor in the UK - yet Khan & Corbyn seem determined to put this crucial relationship at risk. We will not allow US-UK relations to be endangered by some puffed up pompous popinjay in City Hall.


:toss:


I mean, even most TORIES don't like Trump. Who exactly does he think he is impressing with this?


Michael Fabricant?

He was just on BBC News with his best hair on (actually combed down for a change) to back Boris up.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 1:20 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 15135
Has thanked: 83414 times
Been thanked: 13651 times
Good-afternoon, everyone


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 1:29 pm 
Offline
Secretary of State

Joined: Sun 29 Nov, 2015 1:24 pm
Posts: 1355
Has thanked: 4530 times
Been thanked: 2020 times
Afternoon !

PFY "" Yes. We have a representative democracy. Use a referendum when a significant change to that system is proposed. Otherwise not.""

Also paying close addition to super-majorities, used over the rest of the world for any constitutional changes .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 2:02 pm 
Online
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4978
Has thanked: 10250 times
Been thanked: 12211 times
I enjoyed this article on trying to live "plastic free" as encouraged by Theresa May. We could all certainly do a little more, but it does bring us back to the question May declined to answer "why don't the government ask producers to do more"?

It's not like we all went to the greengrocers and said, "you know what, I'm really not keen on this whole weighing out exactly what I want and putting it in a paper bag malarkey, why don't you wrap twice as many carrots than I need in plastic and charge me for the privilege" did we?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/ent ... ssion=true
Quote:
I Tried Avoiding Plastic For A Week – It Was Difficult
From lunch to loo roll, alternatives to products using plastic were often hard to find and much more expensive.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 2:47 pm 
Offline
Secretary of State

Joined: Sun 29 Nov, 2015 1:24 pm
Posts: 1355
Has thanked: 4530 times
Been thanked: 2020 times
Our recycling bins are suppposed to be for plastic bottles, but I put a variety of other plastic containers in too .

Maybe if they finish up with tons of heavier plastic containers they MIGHT just think of a useful process for using them !

Frog4 was in Germany a couple of years ago . People were bringing back their bottles to shops ... so old-fasioned .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 4:53 pm 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1960
Has thanked: 13166 times
Been thanked: 3978 times
howsillyofme1 wrote:
Quote:
I agree (but abstain on the much cleverer and subtle, bit)
but maybe Labour could be doing more to question what type of trade deals would be available post Brexit & whether they match up to the 'leave' promises



Possibly they could - and to be fair they are a bit. The difficulty is that the media (abetted by some who should know better) are screaming for Labour to say more but actually they are not interested unless it can be spun as controversial. Starmer can point out the inconsistencies and nonsense the Government's position is as much as he likes but a Labour amendment on the CU can be spun as a 'split' or 'rebellion' and is of far more interest

I am a bit of a political nerd so go looking for things but how many people calling for more from Labour are actually dépendent on the mainstream media to get that information - and do you think this area of the media is neutral and fair in their coverage of Brexit, and of Labour in general?

The issues around Brexit are complex as we move into what the deals will look like and someone like Starmer is clever enough to understand this and so does not simplify it to a point that goes into a meaningless soundbite or pretend the answers are easy. Davis though is a classic example of the Dunning-Kruger effect so he can sound blasé and confident about things

howsillyofme1 wrote:
Quote:
I agree (but abstain on the much cleverer and subtle, bit)
but maybe Labour could be doing more to question what type of trade deals would be available post Brexit & whether they match up to the 'leave' promises



Possibly they could - and to be fair they are a bit. The difficulty is that the media (abetted by some who should know better) are screaming for Labour to say more but actually they are not interested unless it can be spun as controversial. Starmer can point out the inconsistencies and nonsense the Government's position is as much as he likes but a Labour amendment on the CU can be spun as a 'split' or 'rebellion' and is of far more interest

I am a bit of a political nerd so go looking for things but how many people calling for more from Labour are actually dépendent on the mainstream media to get that information - and do you think this area of the media is neutral and fair in their coverage of Brexit, and of Labour in general?

The issues around Brexit are complex as we move into what the deals will look like and someone like Starmer is clever enough to understand this and so does not simplify it to a point that goes into a meaningless soundbite or pretend the answers are easy. Davis though is a classic example of the Dunning-Kruger effect so he can sound blasé and confident about things

I think what I'm after is a pre-emptive anti-brexit angle on areas where it's likely to fall far short of what leave voters had been promised. It would be kind of priming the pumps in anticipation - a bit like Brexiteers had been doing for years sowing anti eu feelings - so that people are pre-conditioned to feel dissatisfied with a hard Brexit settlement.
I think I've managed to be naive and cynical at the same time.
:?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 5:01 pm 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1960
Has thanked: 13166 times
Been thanked: 3978 times
frog222 wrote:
Our recycling bins are suppposed to be for plastic bottles, but I put a variety of other plastic containers in too .

Maybe if they finish up with tons of heavier plastic containers they MIGHT just think of a useful process for using them !

Frog4 was in Germany a couple of years ago . People were bringing back their bottles to shops ... so old-fasioned .

It's irritating that so much packaging says its recyclable but only in some areas, I suspect some local authorities only provide a recycling scheme so that they meet minimum legislation targets, but have no incentive to widen the materials they take.
So maybe widening their horizons might help ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 5:06 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7887
Has thanked: 788 times
Been thanked: 16833 times
Willow904 wrote:
I enjoyed this article on trying to live "plastic free" as encouraged by Theresa May. We could all certainly do a little more, but it does bring us back to the question May declined to answer "why don't the government ask producers to do more"?


Not doing so just raises the suspicion they are just indulging in "feel good" window dressing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 5:54 pm 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1960
Has thanked: 13166 times
Been thanked: 3978 times
I heard a program on Irish radio ('Alexa play rte on tunein'), a couple of weeks ago about having pioneered plastic bag tax. It included an interview with a Kenyan politician about their, (rather severe), penalties on using plastic bags.
(possibly old news to some, but I'd missed it):

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... 40000-fine
"Kenya brings in world's toughest plastic bag ban: four years jail or $40,000 fine"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 12 Jan, 2018 5:57 pm 
Online
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7887
Has thanked: 788 times
Been thanked: 16833 times
That would be a lot of money here, never mind there :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 101 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], PorFavor, Willow904 and 40 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group