Monday 15th December 2014

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:46 am

Morning.

The benefit cap propaganda machine has been activated.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 6:44 am

Morning all.

Loving the Kipper mess in Thurrock. Supposedly this is one of their realistic seat prospects (well, according to them anyway), losing three prospective candidates inside a week must be enhancing their standing in the area no end!

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 6:57 am

Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 7:16 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?

It's the elephant in the room, something UKIP and the Tories don't talk about. Immigrants don't travel here and then "steal" our jobs, our own companies actively look abroad to hire workers rather than hire local young adults and the reason they do that is not educational standards, it's not work ethic, it's all about money.

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 7:37 am

Why is it that whenever a UKIP member/candidate says something extreme they think that a satisfactory excuse is to blame in on tiredness or pain medication? They're basically saying that they'd never have said it if it wasn't for something that made them forget their public persona for a brief moment. I get kidney stones but never during any of the intensely painful episodes have I started spouting extreme political ideology or hate speech. The thoughts have to be there from the start for pain or tiredness to allow us a brief and nauseating glimpse at the real person behind the mask they wear for the public.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 8:01 am

HindleA wrote:Morning.

The benefit cap propaganda machine has been activated.

What do you mean, A? Has something happened?

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 8:07 am

ephemerid wrote:
HindleA wrote:Morning.

The benefit cap propaganda machine has been activated.

What do you mean, A? Has something happened?

A report out, according to Today.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30470116

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 8:27 am

Spacedone wrote:Why is it that whenever a UKIP member/candidate says something extreme they think that a satisfactory excuse is to blame in on tiredness or pain medication? They're basically saying that they'd never have said it if it wasn't for something that made them forget their public persona for a brief moment. I get kidney stones but never during any of the intensely painful episodes have I started spouting extreme political ideology or hate speech. The thoughts have to be there from the start for pain or tiredness to allow us a brief and nauseating glimpse at the real person behind the mask they wear for the public.

It's fascinating, isn't it?

The article about Smith on the G has more than 1,000 comments on it now - with Kippers all over it going on about what a good bloke he is really etc. and totally failing to see that even if there was any truth in the analgesia/sedative thing he's still a racist git.

Most of the Kipper infestation over there seems to be either pretending that UKIP are not racists because they want to believe it, or pretending that UKIP are not racists because they are racists themselves and are too scared to say so in public because they know what the reaction would be.

This reminds me of what my mother used to say about Germany before the war. She said that most people knew in their hearts that most of the propaganda was wrong, but they needed scapegoats for their own problems and the Nazis duly provided them.
Back then, there were no real alternative ways to find out what was really going on beyond what people were told by the government; and although many Germans were against what the propaganda was saying in private, as time went on it became so dangerous to voice dissent that very few people risked it. It only took a few years for the propaganda to be accepted as fact - and of course there were plenty of folks who agreed with it all and their number increased as time went on.

We have the luxury of much freer speech and we have had a much more tolerant outlook for many years - people who are obviously racist get called out, and that's why people who hold such views won't admit it.
But it seems to me that they are becoming more confident in saying abhorrent things about immigrants (by which they mean black, brown, muslim) or Eastern Europeans (by which they mean gypsies or roma) and they are every bit as vitriolic about people who are not the same as them. Or who they perceive as not the same - disabled people, benefit scroungers, whatever.

I've noticed a sort of casual racism/disablism creeping in to some of the comments in various places which is tolerated in a way it wasn't a few years ago. I think the rise of the Kippers is a symptom of this. People holding such views appear to be more confident in expressing them, however much they tie themselves in knots trying to pretend they don't.
The facts are that many ordinary people in this country are suffering - jobs, wages, lifestyles, all being mercilessly attacked by a government that simply doesn't care about people who don't have much. Some of those ordinary people are lashing out, and it's in that atmosphere that fascist politics thrives. We've seen it all before, and I find it chilling.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:02 am

ephemerid wrote:Most of the Kipper infestation over there seems to be either pretending that UKIP are not racists because they want to believe it, or pretending that UKIP are not racists because they are racists themselves and are too scared to say so in public because they know what the reaction would be.

You forgot option number 3; what they're saying is just common sense, innit, it is only political correctness that means they can't say what is obvious to everybody. I mean, them all them Rooomanians and Muslamics and Darkies and Paddies, they're all the same aren't they ......

Some of those people don't see themselves as racists because, quite simply, they believe that is a concept made up by us Lefties; problem for Farage, Carswell and Reckless is, as much as they try to say UKIP is not a racist party, it is the natural home for these people, the "Enoch was right" brigade, and there is nothing they can do about it.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:08 am

yahyah wrote:
ephemerid wrote:
HindleA wrote:Morning.

The benefit cap propaganda machine has been activated.

What do you mean, A? Has something happened?

A report out, according to Today.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30470116

Thank you.

I've just read it and it's nonsense.

It says that Housing Benefit costs £17 Billion. It doesn't. It costs more than £24 Billion (at the last count) and it's rising.
As the BBC thing is just headlines and its facts are wrong, I've had a brief look at the first (of 4) reports.

It says that the focus of the report is 429 claimants who were affected by the cap in October 2013 and who agreed to be followed up.
78% of them are still affected by the cap.

Of those, 30% had cut back on "non-essentials"; 35% have spent less on "essentials".
26% had moved to a cap-exempted benefit.
59% applied for Discretionary Housing Payments; 39% are in rent arrears and most say their arrears are increasing.
10% had moved to new accommodation; 51% cite affordability and suitability of another property being a barrier to moving.
Asked about running out of money before the end of the week/month, 50% said this happens often.
80% of all those affected are women.
40% have a health problem or disability but have not qualified for exempted benefits.
13% of all those affected are already working.
42% have private landlords.

Of the remaining 22%, half of them moved into work. It doesn't say what sort of work, and it doesn't say if they still claim some benefits. As 27,000 claims are affected by the cap nationally, that extrapolates to about 300 people finding work.
There is. of course, no evidence to suggest they might not have done so anyway.
The barriers to work are - availability and cost of childcare. 43%; poor health 27%, caring for a family member 24%.

Throughout the text, the researchers (IpsosMori) note that their figures are not expressed in the same way as "official statistics" and also point out in several places that caution should be applied to what look like positive results as they can't be proven.

What will happen is this - it will be reported that 50% of those affected by the cap have decided to look for work.
The issues experienced by those who have not will be ignored.
Journalists will not read the 4 reports or analyse their contents.
IDS will declare it a roaring success.

Thank you.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:23 am

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

Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published

The Mail continuing to use the "1200 needless deaths" meme is the true scandal here.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:28 am

Morning all.

So the BBC choose to lead their on the hour headline segment re Miliband's speech on immigration with the line that 'A Labour strategy document advises not to discuss immigration ...'

Predictable I suppose but bloody annoying too. I'd like to know what the context is for such advice ... there can be sound reasons for moving a conversation on which aren't about a desire not to talk about immigration. And - this headline ignores the fact that Miliband and Labour are - in setting out their policies today - doing just that - talking about immigration.

Glad to see these comments:

George Eaton retweeted
Anoosh Chakelian @AnooshChakelian · 46m 46 minutes ago
Embarrassing to have its strategy leaked, but Labour's approach to immigration concerns is ultimately wise: http://bit.ly/1vQHEO1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

George Eaton @georgeeaton · 50m 50 minutes ago
As @AnooshChakelian says, Labour advice to move conversations with voters on from immigration if necessary is wise: http://bit.ly/1vQHEO1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:32 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?

This could be the first shot at the Nats:

The new Scottish Labour leader will announce a fresh rewriting of Clause Four – the party’s statement of its aims and values – to “set in stone the total devolution of policy-making” from Westminster to Holyrood.

Not that it will stop the hate-fest.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3634446

And, if I may say so, he looks a whole lot fitter than our esteemed PM!

Morning all.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:34 am

norman smith @BBCNormanS · 12m 12 minutes ago
Scottish @libdems are "once proud party reduced to joke status" says @AlexSalmond

norman smith @BBCNormanS · 14m 14 minutes ago
Scottish @libdems down on just 3% in @scottishsun poll

norman smith @BBCNormanS · 15m 15 minutes ago
SNP lead Labour by 47% to 27% says poll in @scottishsun

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:40 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ished.html

Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published

The Mail continuing to use the "1200 needless deaths" meme is the true scandal here.

Our new Twitter friend James Titcombe is all over this one like a rash; that "Tweeting in a personal capacity" defence is looking increasingly flimsy. No response from him to my question of last night, no real shock there I guess.

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:42 am

Interesting piece in the Guardian for the usual negative reasons: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ain-topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Head of Library responds to complaints about the perception that the Guardian over-features Russell Brand by conducting an examination of just how much he appears in the library then, after a list of the technical methods by which the information is collated, just happens to omit any information about how often Russell Brand appears. I wonder why.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:44 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all.

So the BBC choose to lead their on the hour headline segment re Miliband's speech on immigration with the line that 'A Labour strategy document advises not to discuss immigration ...'

Predictable I suppose but bloody annoying too. I'd like to know what the context is for such advice ... there can be sound reasons for moving a conversation on which aren't about a desire not to talk about immigration. And - this headline ignores the fact that Miliband and Labour are - in setting out their policies today - doing just that - talking about immigration.

Glad to see these comments:
George Eaton retweeted
Anoosh Chakelian @AnooshChakelian · 46m 46 minutes ago
Embarrassing to have its strategy leaked, but Labour's approach to immigration concerns is ultimately wise: http://bit.ly/1vQHEO1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

George Eaton @georgeeaton · 50m 50 minutes ago
As @AnooshChakelian says, Labour advice to move conversations with voters on from immigration if necessary is wise: http://bit.ly/1vQHEO1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That strategy document is only reinforcing what we've found on the doorstep anyway; despite the best efforts of the meeja immigration isn't the biggest concern for most people so, in my experience anyway, the sensible thing to do is talk past it if mentioned & get to the real heart of their concerns. As per usual lot of Westminster Village fuss about nothing ..... in fact so much fuss you have to wonder what little gem Lynton is trying to cover up this time.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:48 am

Eric_WLothian wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?
This could be the first shot at the Nats:
The new Scottish Labour leader will announce a fresh rewriting of Clause Four – the party’s statement of its aims and values – to “set in stone the total devolution of policy-making” from Westminster to Holyrood.
Not that it will stop the hate-fest.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3634446

And, if I may say so, he looks a whole lot fitter than our esteemed PM!

Morning all.

Beginning to think that Murphy as leader of Scottish Labour may be a good thing - not least because it will keep him very busy. He seems to have a lot of energy ... better he channels it to achieving positive things in Scotland than being frustrated around Westminster stuff.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 9:50 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ished.html

Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published

The Mail continuing to use the "1200 needless deaths" meme is the true scandal here.
Our new Twitter friend James Titcombe is all over this one like a rash; that "Tweeting in a personal capacity" defence is looking increasingly flimsy. No response from him to my question of last night, no real shock there I guess.

That's the usual tactic from the Cure brigade. Just ignore.

Why James Titcombe has any substantive role in healthcare is beyond me. His qualification is that his baby boy died in hospital and that inquiries found that this was potentially avoidable and that the family had been treated badly. Of course he can't just put all this behind him and make rational and balanced observations on the system. So why expect him to?

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:04 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Eric_WLothian wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?
This could be the first shot at the Nats:
The new Scottish Labour leader will announce a fresh rewriting of Clause Four – the party’s statement of its aims and values – to “set in stone the total devolution of policy-making” from Westminster to Holyrood.
Not that it will stop the hate-fest.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3634446

And, if I may say so, he looks a whole lot fitter than our esteemed PM!

Morning all.
Beginning to think that Murphy as leader of Scottish Labour may be a good thing - not least because it will keep him very busy. He seems to have a lot of energy ... better he channels it to achieving positive things in Scotland than being frustrated around Westminster stuff.

It does appear Murphy is increasingly showing his true colours, and out and out old fashioned bruiser, not particularly fussed on the bloke, but as you say it keeps him out of mischief down south and takes his fight onto something else, the SNP.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:08 am

From LadyCentauria last post on the Saturday/Sunday Politics edition:

Abbott has just said that the Myefo statement (Mid-year economic and financial outlook) will go ahead as normal today (Monday in Australia) despite the serious hostage situation in Sydney. At least 30 people are being held hostage by at least one gunman at the Lindt Cafe, directly opposite Channel 7's Newsroom, in Martin Place in the financial centre of Sydney. All the buildings in the area (including the Newsroom) are being evacuated, the rail stations have all been closed.

They have evacuated everyone who is neither a patient nor a member of staff from the major hospital at the end of the road. Some hostages are pressed against the windows of the coffee shop with their hands up. Two of them were made to use their raised hands to hold up a black flag with the Shahada* written in white – the flag which is used by ISIS and similar groups. One of the gunmen is wearing a headband with writing on it. One of the hostages against the window surreptitiously signalled throat-cutting as she was being forced against the window. It is awful and there are hordes of State and Federal Police on site, along with what are described as "other Commonwealth agencies."

Unfortunately for Australians, today is a good day to bury bad news...

*The Shahada is the declaration of faith in Islam. Many contributors to BBC and Sky News channels are saying that this display of the Shahada (on a black background) is a desecration of it and of their faith; that it is being used in this way is a source of shame – a hijacking of an article of faith. It seems to me that Moslems, in general, are feeling pretty much the way (and probably worse, really) that we have felt as the Union Flag and the Cross of St. George were hijacked by NF, BNP, etc., over the past however-many-years.

The full post with conversations leading to LadyCentauria's post linked below.

http://flythenest.org/viewtopic.php?p=20333#p20333

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:09 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ished.html

Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published

The Mail continuing to use the "1200 needless deaths" meme is the true scandal here.
Our new Twitter friend James Titcombe is all over this one like a rash; that "Tweeting in a personal capacity" defence is looking increasingly flimsy. No response from him to my question of last night, no real shock there I guess.
That's the usual tactic from the Cure brigade. Just ignore.

Why James Titcombe has any substantive role in healthcare is beyond me. His qualification is that his baby boy died in hospital and that inquiries found that this was potentially avoidable and that the family had been treated badly. Of course he can't just put all this behind him and make rational and balanced observations on the system. So why expect him to?

Why expect him to? Well, because part of the job conditions for the role he has is a clear duty to remain impartial; and, however many time he says he is "tweeting in a personal capacity", the pronouncements of a (relatively) senior figure in the CQC hierarchy will carry additional weight because of the presumption that he has privileged access to facts & figures .... which, of course, he does. What he is doing clearly breaches the Civil Service Code; for example, there are restrictions on dealings with lobbyists such as St Julie, he is ignoring those restrictions and has effectively become an anti-Labour, anti-Burnham, anti-NHS lobbyist himself.

If this were a Labour Government in power and a civil servant was openly leaking like this he would have been hung out to dry. But under this Government some departments have become little more than mouthpieces for the Tory Party and their vested interests; so, yes, I can ignore it but I'm just cussed enough no longer want to tolerate what is being done in my name, with my money, by people who I utterly despise.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:11 am

@GS

"Why expect him to?"

I completely agree with you. What I'm saying is he should never have been in the role in the first place.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:27 am

Humanist weddings could stay illegal following Coalition row between Tories and Liberal Democrats
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 24521.html
... The Lib Dems want people who are agnostic, atheist or simply do not want a religious ceremony to be able to have a secular wedding, outside of a register office. Couples could tailor their own ceremonies, and select venues that are not licensed for civil weddings.

But it was reported on Sunday that Downing Street is now blocking the idea because Lynton Crosby, David Cameron’s election strategist, sees it as a “fringe” issue that could muddy the Government’s key messages ahead of May’s general election....

What? Am I getting a whiff of some nasty under thoughts that a non religious marriage might be considered as 'toxic' an issue as gay marriage is for some of the Conservative flock? We can't upset them any more than we already have Dave ... says Lynton.

Pathetic stuff.

And - very sadly - I'll have to tell Mr Riots that we're putting our never never marriage plans back on hold. It's the religious stuff that puts me right off. We've been thinking we ought to do something to protect each other as we get older ... make sure we have rights as next of kin etc ... but neither of us want what is currently on offer to us. Civil partnership - yes - humanist marriage - OK.

Andrew Copson, the chief executive of the BHA, described Number 10’s intervention as “astonishing”, saying it would be a “huge shock” for thousands of couples.

He said: “It is shameful that Number 10 would block the wish of thousands of couples to start their married life in a way that is personal and meaningful to them. Giving legal recognition to humanist marriages is a simple measure which adversely affects no one, has huge popular and political support, and would increase the number of people getting married each year.

“Under this government, Scientologists have been added to the list of religions that can perform legal marriages… To describe the legal recognition of humanist marriages as a “fringe” issue insults the many non-religious couples – much larger in number than these many small religious groups - whose planned marriages next year will not be able to go ahead if Number 10 blocks this change.”

That is crazy - and very unjust.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:39 am

Community shop opens to sell surplus food from supermarkets to the poor
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 24606.html
... Britain’s first “community supermarket” opens for business today, allowing hundreds of struggling families to buy surplus food donated by shops including Marks & Spencer and Ocado at 70 per cent discount – with 20 more planned across the country.

The Community Shop, in Lambeth, south London, will sell low-cost, high-quality surplus food to residents on income support while helping them back into work.

Well - bit of sloppy reporting there - we know it's not the first - we were discussing Goldthorpe and the other company shops yesterday. But - glad to see this news. I hope there will be far more than 20 of these though. No mention of Wales ... is this just an England based initiative?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:50 am

Ed Miliband 15 December 2014 - Great Yarmouth

‘Today, I am announcing that the next Labour government will go further still: making it a criminal offence to undercut pay or conditions by exploiting migrant workers. We are serving notice on employers who bring workers here under duress or on false terms and pay them significantly lower wages, with worse terms and conditions.

This new criminal offence will provide protection to everyone. It will help ensure that, when immigrants work here, they do not face exploitation themselves and rogue employers are stopped from undercutting the terms and conditions of everyone else.

The choice at the next election is whether we change our economy to make it work for everyday people or carry on with an approach which means it works only for a privileged few at the top. We can’t do that unless we deal with the undercutting of wages which is made possible by the exploitation of migrant workers.

Neither the Tories nor UKIP will do any of this. They turn a blind eye to exploitation and undercutting because it is part of the low skill, low wage, fast-buck economy they think Britain needs to succeed. We won’t make false promises on immigration, like David Cameron. And we won’t offer false solutions like UKIP—leaving the European union would be a disaster for jobs, business and families.

Instead, we will offer clear, credible and concrete solutions which help build a country that works for working people again.”

http://labourlist.org/2014/12/labour-wi ... -miliband/

Please check the above at Labour Press - I'm unable to locate it yet - the quote came from LabourList - what Miliband is expected to say in his speech today. I'm pleased. This is fair. It's employers, the ones with the power to hire unfairly, who are targeted. I'm very pleased, indeed.

http://labourlist.org/wp-content/upload ... nities.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 10:52 am

Been catching up with the Any Questions podcast. Jeremy Browne, good grief.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 11:06 am

Spacedone wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?
It's the elephant in the room, something UKIP and the Tories don't talk about. Immigrants don't travel here and then "steal" our jobs, our own companies actively look abroad to hire workers rather than hire local young adults and the reason they do that is not educational standards, it's not work ethic, it's all about money.

Precisely! Thank you! 'Skills gap' or 'lazy UK workers' - nothing true in either, the jobs aren't offered to local people because it costs companies more to do so. Agencies are used to bypass regulations. I'm pleased Miliband knows who's responsible - it's not workers of any nationality - it's some employers.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 11:13 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?

(my bold)

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... weaknesses" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The proposed new law is modelled on one in Germany, where section 233 of the Criminal Code states that employers may not impose "working conditions that are in clear discrepancy to those of other workers performing the same or a similar activity"."

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 11:18 am

citizenJA wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?
(my bold)

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... weaknesses" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The proposed new law is modelled on one in Germany, where section 233 of the Criminal Code states that employers may not impose "working conditions that are in clear discrepancy to those of other workers performing the same or a similar activity"."

Thanks for the info CJA. As Lord Chancellor I should really keep myself up to date

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 11:24 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all.

So the BBC choose to lead their on the hour headline segment re Miliband's speech on immigration with the line that 'A Labour strategy document advises not to discuss immigration ...'

Predictable I suppose but bloody annoying too. I'd like to know what the context is for such advice ... there can be sound reasons for moving a conversation on which aren't about a desire not to talk about immigration. And - this headline ignores the fact that Miliband and Labour are - in setting out their policies today - doing just that - talking about immigration.

Glad to see these comments:
George Eaton retweeted
Anoosh Chakelian @AnooshChakelian · 46m 46 minutes ago
Embarrassing to have its strategy leaked, but Labour's approach to immigration concerns is ultimately wise: http://bit.ly/1vQHEO1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

George Eaton @georgeeaton · 50m 50 minutes ago
As @AnooshChakelian says, Labour advice to move conversations with voters on from immigration if necessary is wise: http://bit.ly/1vQHEO1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The BBC is blatantly awful. Print the truth, that's all I ask. Or at least put it into the Editorial section where it belongs.

Media attempting to make scandal where none exists. Perhaps the 'leaked strategy' was the document linked below? Precise & critical of employment practises that render all workers, regardless of their nationality, in vulnerable positions in the work place.

http://labourlist.org/wp-content/upload ... nities.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 11:35 am

StephenDolan wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

I was intrigued by http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index. ... see-chart/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

given the laughing at how Labour is doomed in Scotland under Murphy.

Glad to see Miliband approaching the "nasty immigrants stealing our jobs" issue by targeting the exclusive advertising abroad by agencies. I couldn't tell from the press release if Labour are explicitly looking at the Swedish derogation too?
(my bold)

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... weaknesses" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The proposed new law is modelled on one in Germany, where section 233 of the Criminal Code states that employers may not impose "working conditions that are in clear discrepancy to those of other workers performing the same or a similar activity"."
Thanks for the info CJA. As Lord Chancellor I should really keep myself up to date

Oh, look! I've been made Foreign Secretary! A proud day for me. My idea of secret intelligence is to keep my intelligence a secret (literary reference to Mr Nadgett from Martin Chuzzlewit). The owls Labour will give to the population when in government were my idea too. The Internet & Twitter are all very well. With Royal Mail in a tough spot, I thought it best to have alternative communication mediums. Pigeons won't do for messages these days. Owls. You read it here first.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 11:55 am

yahyah wrote:
ephemerid wrote:
HindleA wrote:Morning.

The benefit cap propaganda machine has been activated.

What do you mean, A? Has something happened?

A report out, according to Today.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30470116

That excuse-for-a-man really does live with his fingers in his ears, in his la-la-land of his belief™ of whatisreallyhappening™ and thetruthisandthisisreallyimportant™, doesn't he...

Watching his interview with Andrew Neil on yesterday's Sunday Politics, I lost count of the number of times he said something and I burst out with "that's a lie", "liar", "you are lying" or suchlike when he declared therealityof™ some statistic or research finding. His continued insistence that The Business Case for UC has been fully signed off, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, just showed that he has no contact with real reality at all! There is something wrong with him that goes way beyond simply being a Tory

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 11:57 am

Francis "Jerry Can" Maude has been a bit quiet lately.

Still, he's made up for it today, having informed the Torygraph that hospitals and fire services are to be run outside the public sector.

He says that as government spending falls, public services will be run by "mutuals" or "other private companies".
In fact, he opines that "every duty of the state" (except defence and policing) could be done outside the public sector.

And how will government spending fall, I wonder?

Francis has the answer - "Public sector jobs and wages would have to fall sharply to ensure the government lives within its means".

So - now we know. As if we didn't know this before. As if LetBin hadn't already told us the NHS would be gone after 5 years of the Tories.

Bastards.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 12:21 pm

ephemerid wrote:Francis "Jerry Can" Maude has been a bit quiet lately.

Still, he's made up for it today, having informed the Torygraph that hospitals and fire services are to be run outside the public sector.

He says that as government spending falls, public services will be run by "mutuals" or "other private companies".
In fact, he opines that "every duty of the state" (except defence and policing) could be done outside the public sector.

And how will government spending fall, I wonder?

Francis has the answer - "Public sector jobs and wages would have to fall sharply to ensure the government lives within its means".

So - now we know. As if we didn't know this before. As if LetBin hadn't already told us the NHS would be gone after 5 years of the Tories.

Bastards.

(my bold)

Hang on - did you see Bernard Hogan-Howe's (Commissioner of the Metropolitan police) CIF article penned yesterday?

We have to have a shared view of the risks to public safety, from countering terrorism to child protection. We must be open about these risks with the public, politicians and the media, so we can together make informed choices about our priorities. We should share support services where possible, and make them as efficient as the best of the private sector. That means opening up all but core policing functions to competition.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -austerity" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Egads.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 12:29 pm

"So - now we know."
- Ephemerid

A small mercy we're allowed - we're in no doubt of Austerity Forever, the United CorporateState Kingdom & would-you-like-some-fries-with-that society according to current leadership, the Tory-led coalition, if returned to government.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 12:47 pm

Re public services...I think we've known for a while now. Take this from 2011.

David Cameron promises public sector revolution

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... ution.html

The changes could ultimately see many functions of the NHS – from operations to walk-in triage services – being run by private firms. All schools could be run by charities or private sector companies, as could municipal services such as maintaining parks, adult care, special schools or roads maintenance.

Outside providers would be offered payment-by-results contracts, which would earn them more as they increased the quality of services.

Downing Street said the plans illustrated that Mr Cameron was prepared to go far further than any recent prime minister – including Tony Blair – on public sector reform.

The only exemptions will be the judiciary and the security services. All other public services will be expected to open up to private competition under the plans, which the Government hopes will slash
bureaucracy, improve the quality of public services and save money.

Now, apparently the only exemptions are defence and the police. Presumably because that would really frighten the public.

Cradle to the grave with Serco, Sodexo etc...

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 12:49 pm

The tumbling oil price has led to a trebling of insolvencies among UK oil and gas services companies so far this year, while £55bn of further oil projects reportedly under threat.

A report due on Monday from accountancy firm Moore Stephens said 18 businesses in the UK oil and gas services sector had become insolvent in 2014 compared with just six last year. It said that although the increase was from a low base, it was significant because insolvencies in the sector had been rare over the last five years.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ce-tumbles

How about a nice wind turbine? No subsidises for me, thank you, put it in the garden, no problem at all. The solar panels on the South facing, please, any further insulation left over, feel free to teach me to install it, I'm game.

edited due to formatting errors

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 12:51 pm

As I mentioned in a conversation, yesterday, The Community Shop has opened their brand new branch – Lambeth Community Shop – in Vale Street, West Norwood, Lambeth.

Good piece on it on DP and their is more information in the news section of Community-Shop UKs website, here:
http://community-shop.co.uk/news/giving ... rpose.aspx

You can follow the @CommunityShops on Twitter, too – if you are a tweeter.

Post by **refitman** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 12:53 pm

Tee-hee:

Miliband has been taking questions for almost half an hour now, but he still has not yet taken any questions from journalists.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 12:58 pm

According to Andrew Sparrow, Ed Miliband is attracting some criticism because his speech on immigration was "too short"

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:00 pm

refitman wrote:Tee-hee:
Miliband has been taking questions for almost half an hour now, but he still has not yet taken any questions from journalists.

Yes and surprise surprise the questions are largely relevant to the real world rather than the Westminster Village and Ed's responses are useful to the questioners.

How the journos must hate it

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:00 pm

refitman wrote:Tee-hee:
Miliband has been taking questions for almost half an hour now, but he still has not yet taken any questions from journalists.

Hugo wasn't impressed...before today's incarnation got zapped.

I do wonder if the mods know that he's a paid troll and know exactly where he's posting from which is why he gets removed very time he pops up. He's basically harmless so there must be a reason for his consistent removal.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:04 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Re public services...I think we've known for a while now. Take this from 2011.

David Cameron promises public sector revolution

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... ution.html

The changes could ultimately see many functions of the NHS – from operations to walk-in triage services – being run by private firms. All schools could be run by charities or private sector companies, as could municipal services such as maintaining parks, adult care, special schools or roads maintenance.

Outside providers would be offered payment-by-results contracts, which would earn them more as they increased the quality of services.

Downing Street said the plans illustrated that Mr Cameron was prepared to go far further than any recent prime minister – including Tony Blair – on public sector reform.

The only exemptions will be the judiciary and the security services. All other public services will be expected to open up to private competition under the plans, which the Government hopes will slash
bureaucracy, improve the quality of public services and save money.
Now, apparently the only exemptions are defence and the police. Presumably because that would really frighten the public.

Cradle to the grave with Serco, Sodexo etc...

I think these plans will actually be 'beyond the pale' for many Conservatives who can see for themselves how well the other privatised services have turned out for us - private health cock ups that the NHS has to put right, water bills rocketing, trains being priced beyond most people, energy hahaha .... So bring it on Jerry Can and Ham Face, your SercoCapita Utopia will scare the pants off a lot of your own supporters.

mikems · Post by **mikems** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:06 pm

Roger,

They are not 'moderators', they are inciters.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:07 pm

Populus today has Labour up a point, UKIP down 2 - Lab 36 Con 34 UKIP 12 LibDem 10.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:09 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
refitman wrote:Tee-hee:
Miliband has been taking questions for almost half an hour now, but he still has not yet taken any questions from journalists.
Hugo wasn't impressed...before today's incarnation got zapped.

I do wonder if the mods know that he's a paid troll and know exactly where he's posting from which is why he gets removed very time he pops up. He's basically harmless so there must be a reason for his consistent removal.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:14 pm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -tape.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So-much-for-David-Camerons-promise-to-cut-red-tape

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:15 pm

Mr Maude happened to sit at the next table to me at Chesterfield Railway Station recently,all I could muster was whistling an out of tune rendition of the Red Flag I am afraid.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 15 Dec, 2014 1:17 pm

McBride a tad exasperated, with supposedly strategists who send and write such documents as the one about the latest brouhaha over immigration, I can see his point, shame he gave so much bullets for his opponents to fire back at Labour, still he is a Labour man, and at least, unlike some his criticisms are heartfelt, and pleas for better performances off some.

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