FlyTheNest

Morning all.

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


A&E appointments system proposed in NHS targets shakeup

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

Jeremy Corbyn's spending plan for public services backed by majority

Walking home in gale and monsoon rain was fun,I like to feel the weather.

Morning all.

Sam Coates Times
‏
Verified account

@SamCoatesTimes
6m6 minutes ago
More
I heard Theresa May was warned by senior officials that Salzburg could well be a disaster but political team in No10 pressed ahead anyway, batting away officials for being too gloomy

I’m not sure Operation Blame Olly Robbins - an easy hit for his enemies - is the full picture

Overt blaming of civil servants who can't answer back really is nasty stuff.

Some unamused dogs flying about.

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

RBS and NatWest customers locked out in latest banking glitch
Bank apologises for technical error blocking online and mobile account holders from logging in

Of course it stopped raining and bright sunshine once home.

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ts-shakeup


A&E appointments system proposed in NHS targets shakeup

the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, which represents A&E doctors, rejected the idea. “I would be very surprised if this worked in the NHS. The NHS is filled with innovative ideas that crash and burn,” said its president, Dr Taj Hassan.

Creating a massive administration system around A&E, what could possibly go wrong.

Also re 18 week targets

Nigel Edwards, chief executive of the Nuffield Trust thinktank, said the 18-week target should stay.

“If we cannot take people off the waiting list as fast as they are put on it, waiting times won’t just simply stay a bit above 18 weeks. They will keep getting worse and worse.

This has always seemed obvious to me - if you don't have capacity to move people off the waiting list, it doesn't matter what the target is, you won't meet it long-term.

Ridiculous and dangerous idea IMHO.

This doesn't seem to be paywalled.

Corbyn’s Labour shows it is prepared to shake up the status quo

gilsey wrote:This doesn't seem to be paywalled.

Corbyn’s Labour shows it is prepared to shake up the status quo

Or maybe it is now. Anyway, nice to read in the FT.

I am not overly concerned by some aspects of a prospective Jeremy Corbyn administration. Indeed, in at least six policy areas, which Mr Corbyn and his shadow chancellor John McDonnell are treating as priorities, businesses and the government need to catch up......

While some of Labour’s ideas, such as imposing a productivity mandate on the Bank of England, are unconventional, their readiness to explore new ways of shaking up the status quo is admirable.

Who wrote that?

Astonishingly the government's response to yesterday appears to be to continue to insist that the white paper is still the viable way forward.

adam wrote:Astonishingly the government's response to yesterday appears to be to continue to insist that the white paper is still the viable way forward.

Well, what else can they say right now?

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

adam wrote:Astonishingly the government's response to yesterday appears to be to continue to insist that the white paper is still the viable way forward.

Well, what else can they say right now?

We're very, very sorry.

The FT piece is by Jim O'Neill

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Who wrote that?

Jim O'Neill ?
This might link to it:

https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEM ... id=GB%3Aen" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

adam wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

adam wrote:Astonishingly the government's response to yesterday appears to be to continue to insist that the white paper is still the viable way forward.

Well, what else can they say right now?

We're very, very sorry

Nick Clegg style?

Wasn't he sorry if people had taken offence, rather than that he'd given it?

I think a competent government would have known before publishing the white paper that it would never be acceptable to the EU (which means that whether it was acceptable to their own party is nothing but a distraction). I find it very strange that there were people in the press for the last month or two talking about the proposals as though they were viable, and very strange that people were surprised at what happened yesterday. It's almost like we don't understand anything about the situation we've chosen to put ourselves in.

adam wrote:Astonishingly the government's response to yesterday appears to be to continue to insist that the white paper is still the viable way forward.

I guess it's all about May.

She can rightly say to her Cabinet that they all signed up to this. If she backs away from the Agreement, she's toast.

It's clear Chequers doesn't provide a route to Brexit, but it's the only way she can stay in Downing Street.

And responding to your other thoughts Adam, the establishment is of course complicit in this, for fear of a Corbyn government.

Chequers is like a rather ragged version of the Emperor's New Clothes.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:And responding to your other thoughts Adam, the establishment is of course complicit in this, for fear of a Corbyn government.

Chequers is like a rather ragged version of the Emperor's New Clothes.

A Disturbing development, I thought we were expecting fig leaves.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:And responding to your other thoughts Adam, the establishment is of course complicit in this, for fear of a Corbyn government. Chequers is like a rather ragged version of the Emperor's New Clothes.

Jim O'Neill largely debunks the typical Tory Project Fear line on a commie Corbyn government, and their Trumpian&GOP ideological position on tax cuts --
"" Modern company structures and practices suggest that the historical forms of corporate taxation are no longer sustainable. We need a tax overhaul to link government revenues to business revenues in the country of sale. Or, at a minimum, we should stop cutting corporation tax to increase profits with little societal gain. Here again, Labour is on the mark.""
Cutting Corp Tax is a race to the bottom, just like the old one on competitive devaluation of exchange rates. O'Neill is more of a sensible economist than a former banker and (briefly ) Tory minister !

ps I think a few free reads are still available at the FT, mine still work.

Francis Elliott
‏

@elliotttimes
24m24 minutes ago
More
Latest rumour is a May statement at 1.45pm. Full lectern job. Let's see.

"As you were. Everything's fine"
"Er...Prime Minister..."
"I SAID EVERYTHING'S FINE!"

Theresa May to make a statement at 1.45pm.

Whoops!

Maybe she's going to do a Millwall a la "No-one likes me, I don't care..."

RogerOThornhill wrote:Maybe she's going to do a Millwall a la "No-one likes me, I don't care..."

I've got to the point now where I think that everything rests on her choice of jacket. Ridiculously ill-fitting or business-like? As for jewellery - will it be gob-stoppers on a string or something else?

Oh - and I gather that "resolute" is an "in" phrase. Let's see.




Edited - typo

Apparently, at present, they're falling back on the "if wet, in church hall" plan. Everything has changed (if only the weather).

Oops.

Tom Larkin
@TomLarkinSky
Metaphor alert: there’s currently no power in the room at No 10 where the PM is going to make her speech. Might delay things a bit.

tinybgoat wrote:

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:And responding to your other thoughts Adam, the establishment is of course complicit in this, for fear of a Corbyn government.

Chequers is like a rather ragged version of the Emperor's New Clothes.

A Disturbing development, I thought we were expecting fig leaves.

Touche!

The Indy has

Theresa May to make mystery statement

The fact that there currently is no power in Downing Street is very Thick of It stuff...

RogerOThornhill wrote:Maybe she's going to do a Millwall a la "No-one likes me, I don't care..."

Nothing. Has. Changed.

adam wrote:I find it very strange that there were people in the press for the last month or two talking about the proposals as though they were viable, and very strange that people were surprised at what happened yesterday. It's almost like we don't understand anything about the situation we've chosen to put ourselves in.

Partly that and partly that they can't get out of the habit of supporting the tory govt, I'd say.

No deal?

Apparently we don't know what the real issues are and must hear from the EU.

It's all a mystery.

She's worked day and night on this for two years apparently. But has yet to discover what the real issues are.

Paul Mason
‏
Verified account

@paulmasonnews
7m7 minutes ago
More
... FTA would divide NI from UK (says May). She's been told by @RobbieGibb to sound angry but as usual she sounds deranged....

I was conjecturing the other day that the leaders at Salzburg had decided not to kick the can down the road any longer, if so possibly we should be grateful to them. Better a crisis now than in January.

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:No deal?

Making that explicit would surely mean (more) government resignations?

Laura Kuenssberg
‏
Verified account

@bbclaurak
2h2 hours ago
More
Good news (relatively) for govt - hear another cabinet resignation had been planned for this weekend to protest at Chequers plan but because eu leaders gave it such a kicking yday that bit of the plot is off


!

Poundshop Maggie Thatcher: "I expect respect from the EU"

I think you'll find that respect must be earned. And you deserve none.

Pound down.

Has anyone here yet spotted any EU reaction to the speech?

I'm tired of seeing and hearing John Redwood's ill-informed meanderings on the WTO rules thing. Why does no interviewer challenge him on his basic ignorance (or lies - surely even he can't be that ignorant?)?





Edited - typo

Just heard Stephen Kinnock say "Brekkers" (hastily corrected to "Chequers")!

PorFavor wrote:I'm tired of seeing and hearing John Redwood's ill-informed meanderings on the WTO rules thing. Why does no interviewer challenge him on his basic ignorance (or lies - surely even he can't be that ignorant?)? Edited - typo

For example, the UK is NOT automatically a "FREE" member of the WTO --

"" “It seeks to replicate the concessions and commitments applicable to the UK as part of the EU today. An important milestone as we prepare for our departure from the EU,” British Ambassador Julian Braithwaite wrote in a tweet.

Britain’s draft document, officially known as its “schedule”, is 719 pages long.

“WTO members will have three months to review the schedule, which will be considered to be approved IF there are no objections from other members,” the WTO said in a statement.

Until now the EU has represented Britain at the WTO, and Britain’s membership rights were not set out distinctly, even though Britain was always a WTO member in its own right. Its June 2016 decision to leave the EU meant disentangling their trade rules to allow Britain to act independently.

Britain’s government says that only minimal changes will be needed in the text and it does not expect any difficulties, apart from potentially in agriculture.

Seven agricultural suppliers - including the United States, Canada and Australia - have already said they disapprove of the terms of the divorce, since they will lose flexibility to switch exports between Britain and the rest of the EU.""
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-brita ... KKBN1KE2LJ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The three months are up towards the end of next month . More 'unknowns'...

https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/09/21/th ... the-cliff/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Theresa May takes a big share of the blame for the Salzburg but not all of it. How do they all walk back from
the cliff?"
includes quote from Telegraph article:

Stephanie Riso, the top economist in Mr Barnier’s team, said it would lead to a “level of erosion in the single market” over a 15-year period roughly equal to the impact of a “no deal” exit for the UK – or 8-9 per cent of GDP.
In other words, it would leave the EU carrying the costs of the British vote to leave. The numbers were so toxic that when the British got wind of the presentation, they were forced to intervene “at the highest” level to suppress their publication.
The stay of execution was designed, on the EU side, to give the British a chance to prove that Chequers wasn’t the threat they feared.

PTO