Thursday 8th January 2015

A home from home
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.
User avatar
refitman
Site Admin
Posts: 7692
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:22 pm
Location: Wombwell, United Kingdom

Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by refitman »

Morning all. Labour lead at 1 point on Yougov:

Con 32%, (-1)
Lab 33%, (nc)
LD 7%, (nc)
UKIP 15%, (+2)
GRN 7%; (-1)

APP -20 (+1)
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by rebeccariots2 »

Morning all.

Reposting this from HindleA from late last night. The last post in fact. (I can hear a trumpet as I write that.)
HindleA wrote:
A good summing up of the select committee session into the sanction regime.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... vulnerable
From BTL this had me flabbergasted ... JCP checking registers daily.
brannan765
08 January 2015 8:11am
I teach English at a local college to a mixture of local & Job Centre learners that are sent from the Job Centre to gain quals in English, Maths & ICT.
Over the past 2 years I have witnessed some of my learners treated as if they were a piece of meat by the JCP. I do everything I can to support them & have contacted the local Job Centre to stop these ridiculous sanctions.
One lady in my class yest was crying during the lesson as she was in so much pain - I tried to arrange for her to go home but she refused as she didn't want to miss the lesson & get sanctioned.
The Job Centre are now interfering with tutor's jobs to the extent we cannot teach properly anymore. Registers are checked daily & if a learner is ill or has an emergency, they are immediately sanctioned but only discover this fact until much later on when their JSA does not arrive.
I am sick to my stomach of the corrupt, lying, deceitful & arrogant politicians & Job Centre workers who treat other human beings this way. I do everything I can to help my learners but the DWP & Job Centre are making it impossible.
Working on the wild side.
User avatar
Lonewolfie
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 634
Joined: Fri 29 Aug, 2014 9:05 am

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by Lonewolfie »

Morning all...not sure if this has been linked...

http://hackinginquiry.org/latest-news/s ... jury-told/

Another civil servant, Bettina Jordan Barber received over £100,000 from the Sun with much of the payments authorised by the then editor of The Sun, Rebekah Brooks.

I may be a bit dim and not really understand the whole legal shebang...but isn't this evidence of 'paying a public official' by the flame-haired harpie? I know she (and Jordan-Barber) was/were acquitted at the Hacking Trial (different charges though), but surely this constitutes either perjury or obstructing justice?....oh no....silly me....Newcorpse 'Management & Standards' Committee have decreed that just a few foot soldiers will face justice - certainly not any of the senior people because, of course, if you're the 'right sort' of person, ignorance of the law (and a sugar daddy with a bottomless bank account) IS a defence...

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014 ... ne-hacking

Things may be warming up a bit for Tory Blur too - it seems Uncle Rupert's not impressed...

http://rt.com/uk/215999-blair-deng-murdoch-affair/

...can't wait to hear the condemnation of his tax arrangements from the Coalition of Clowns...maybe not...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -year.html

...at least he's got a nice new job to keep the cashflow healthy...

http://rt.com/news/169960-tony-blair-advise-egypt/

...but it might all be in vain (although I doubt very much whether Despicable Dave will allow the Chilcott Report to be published before he's gone off to improve his finances after humiliation at the ballot box)

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/01/0 ... me-charges
Proud to be 1 of the 76% - Solidarity...because PODEMOS
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by rebeccariots2 »

Rachel Reeves ‏@RachelReevesMP 34m34 minutes ago
The cost of unemployment is huge for older people, their families & for taxpayers. It’s yet more #ToryWelfareWaste http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1074890 ... ld-benefit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
Working on the wild side.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by Willow904 »

Picked up a link to this article btl at the Guardian today and thought I'd share it. It features a letter from a hospital consultant to David Cameron and it's a real cracker:

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/11708558 ... or_claims/
Is it not a crisis when everyday A&E staff up and down the country thinks it is a good shift, if we get a cup of tea, no member of staff is in tears and no one dies in the corridor on our watch? (As opposed to deliver the standard and dignity of care we wish) Or are you saying it is not a crisis because you don't want to admit the real problem and are a tad embarrassed by your mistakes. Because when you came to power you promised to invest in the NHS and not re-organise it. But actually you lied.
Morning all, btw.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
StephenDolan
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3725
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:15 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by StephenDolan »

Morning all.

Oborne on excellent form. I was going to provide a snippet but it really needs reading in its entirety.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... wagon.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by rebeccariots2 »

Andy Burnham ‏@andyburnhammp 58m58 minutes ago
If you want to know why Labour is set on full integration of NHS & social care, read this article by @denis_campbell >http://gu.com/p/44yvb/tw
Integration is essential - but on its own it won't sort out all the problems. There will need to be a real change in thinking and practice ... commissioning the lowest priced, easiest / cherry picked 'packages' of care - can't be the way we go on. People are not packages. What we have now seems to be going the way of the Royal Mail universal delivery requirement ... those with any kind of out of the norm or additional requirement aren't going to get it. Not good enough.

I'm going to say it again. People are not packages.
Working on the wild side.
AnatolyKasparov
Prime Minister
Posts: 15626
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:26 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by AnatolyKasparov »

Blair isn't going to face "war crimes charges" - lets knock that one on the head right away shall we?

And its Press TV, nuff said :twisted:
"IS TONTY BLAIR BEHIND THIS???!!!!111???!!!"
StephenDolan
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3725
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:15 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by StephenDolan »

One of the criticisms of Ed Balls' "Pound shop Ben Elton" description of Russell Brand was that this shows how out of date Balls is with popular culture if he has to reference an 80s comedian.

Thinking on this, who are the modern equivalents? Ben Elton was not alone, there were multiple figures highlighting the Thatcher years cruelty. The volume of material this coalition would provide for Spitting Image. Where is the political satire? All I see is snidey "politicians are all the same" comments from comedians instead of referencing actual social issues. That's about as far as they'll go.
User avatar
adam
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3210
Joined: Wed 27 Aug, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by adam »

StephenDolan wrote:One of the criticisms of Ed Balls' "Pound shop Ben Elton" description of Russell Brand was that this shows how out of date Balls is with popular culture if he has to reference an 80s comedian.

Thinking on this, who are the modern equivalents? Ben Elton was not alone, there were multiple figures highlighting the Thatcher years cruelty. The volume of material this coalition would provide for Spitting Image. Where is the political satire? All I see is snidey "politicians are all the same" comments from comedians instead of referencing actual social issues. That's about as far as they'll go.
I thought Brand's original use of this was excellent, although there was a very good come back in one of the come-backs btw which described Brand as 'A pound-shop Mark Thomas', which I think is a better response. I've come to think that Elton had more of the 'stopped clock' syndrome than any great substance.
I still believe in a town called Hope
StephenDolan
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3725
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:15 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by StephenDolan »

adam wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:One of the criticisms of Ed Balls' "Pound shop Ben Elton" description of Russell Brand was that this shows how out of date Balls is with popular culture if he has to reference an 80s comedian.

Thinking on this, who are the modern equivalents? Ben Elton was not alone, there were multiple figures highlighting the Thatcher years cruelty. The volume of material this coalition would provide for Spitting Image. Where is the political satire? All I see is snidey "politicians are all the same" comments from comedians instead of referencing actual social issues. That's about as far as they'll go.
I thought Brand's original use of this was excellent, although there was a very good come back in one of the come-backs btw which described Brand as 'A pound-shop Mark Thomas', which I think is a better response. I've come to think that Elton had more of the 'stopped clock' syndrome than any great substance.
Agree or disagree with his/their material choices, Ben Elton and Spitting Image were a part of popular culture. They were known by the population. These days, who is there?
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by rebeccariots2 »

Following on Willow's post re the letter to Cameron from the A & E consultant ... here it is in full. He works at the Royal Sussex and it was on the front page of the Brighton Argus. That hospital must have a catchment that includes true blue areas ...
Mr Galloway's letter in full:

Dear Mr Cameron and Mr. Hunt, As someone who works in A&E, I hear with interest that you have said that things in A&E are just busy and we are performing well and not in a crisis.

I though, would disagree. Maybe it is just your sense of reality, which has made you say this or perhaps a lack of comprehension of the words busy vs. crisis.

Is it not a crisis that up and down the country thousands and thousands of patients are being looked after in corridors because there are no free cubicles for them to be seen in?

Is it not a crisis that many hospitals are declaring major incidents (to just cope with normal winter pressures) and some are having tents built in their car parks?

Is it not a crisis that patients who need discharging from the hospital can't because social services can't cope with demand? This means there are no free beds for the patients to go to and so they stay in A&E for hours upon hours.

Is it not a crisis when thousands of patients are having their operations cancelled because there are no beds for them to get into?

Is it not a crisis when every department in the county cannot recruit A&E doctors and nurses because they are emigrating or changing specialty because of the relentless pressure?

Is it not a crisis when everyday A&E staff up and down the country thinks it is a good shift, if we get a cup of tea, no member of staff is in tears and no one dies in the corridor on our watch? (As opposed to deliver the standard and dignity of care we wish) Or are you saying it is not a crisis because you don't want to admit the real problem and are a tad embarrassed by your mistakes. Because when you came to power you promised to invest in the NHS and not re-organise it. But actually you lied.

Health and social care are inextricably linked and you stripped money away from social care whilst still finding the money for tax cuts for millionaires. But worse still, instead of trying to modernise and improve the NHS (which it needs) and working to prevent an absolutely predictable crisis, you spent the time and billions of wasted pounds on an ideological drive to increase the role of the private sector into the NHS, which has just put profits before patients.

The reality is that the crisis (yes it is a crisis, not just busy) is shown up in the corridors of the A&E departments.

And if you don't believe me, please join any of the thousand of A&E staff up and down the country whom are all going through the same problems. Then reality might kick in - seeing people in their 90s lying in a corridor as there is no bed to go to, patients who need to go to intensive care staying for hours upon hours in A&E whilst their condition deteriorates, ambulance staff not being able to get to 999 calls as they are waiting to get their current patients into A&E, nurses not having time to care for patients - just provide treatment, and for the consultants on the shop floor trying to create order and safety in a chaotic environment.

We are so lucky to have the training and skills to do the jobs we do - but we just need you to make it possible for us to perform the job we love to appropriate standards.

It may be hard for all of us who work in A&E, but it is nothing compared to what our patients have to endure. But amazingly it is them that keep us going - with humour, goodwill and not complaining about us despite everything going on, along with a diabetic inducing amount of chocolate being bought for us Mr Hunt and Cameron - I also want to ask you why you think we are performing well? You say it is because around 85-95% of patients get seen and discharged or admitted with four hours (still the worst figures since we started recording this data).

But that hides the reality. It is easy to boost this percentage with easy patients with cuts and colds and minor injuries - but what about the care for the patients who are genuinely sick, the ones who need admission? How quickly do they get seen and admitted? That is the figure that should be made available but isn't. I don't know what the numbers are, but from recent experience from up and down the country, I doubt that at the moment half of patients who get admitted do so within four hours from when they arrive - remember delayed admission leads to worse outcomes. Please start releasing this important figure as it will give a much better barometer for how the NHS is doing.

So Mr Hunt and Mr. Cameron - come down to any A&E and see the crisis/'just busy' and when you do so, listen to the staff who can explain what needs to be done as opposed to listen to your political advisors.In A&Es throughout the country, we are buckling under the strain and it is only because of everyone's hard works and dedication that patient care is being maintained to the extent it is and morale hasn't yet cracked.

It feels that we in the NHS (from porters, to managers, to nurses, to support staff, to paramedics, to hospitals doctor and GPs) are lions being led by donkeys. We are facing 1930s public sector cuts driven by politicians with the mentality of World War One generals.

So in summary - please Cameron and Hunt, stop thinking about your political ideology and start thinking about our patients. Remember the NHS was set up after world war two during a period of unprecedented austerity - stop destroying it under the name of austerity.

Rob Galloway

A&E Consultant

P.S. It must be quite easy going on question time and the like, debating fellow politicians and public figures who everyone knows have their own agenda. But the shop floor workers in the NHS have only one agenda - our patient care, so the debate may not be so easy with us. I would love to debate with you about the NHS crisis and offer some solutions. Are you up for it?
http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/11708558 ... _over_NHS/
Working on the wild side.
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by rebeccariots2 »

StephenDolan wrote:
adam wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:One of the criticisms of Ed Balls' "Pound shop Ben Elton" description of Russell Brand was that this shows how out of date Balls is with popular culture if he has to reference an 80s comedian.

Thinking on this, who are the modern equivalents? Ben Elton was not alone, there were multiple figures highlighting the Thatcher years cruelty. The volume of material this coalition would provide for Spitting Image. Where is the political satire? All I see is snidey "politicians are all the same" comments from comedians instead of referencing actual social issues. That's about as far as they'll go.
I thought Brand's original use of this was excellent, although there was a very good come back in one of the come-backs btw which described Brand as 'A pound-shop Mark Thomas', which I think is a better response. I've come to think that Elton had more of the 'stopped clock' syndrome than any great substance.
Agree or disagree with his/their material choices, Ben Elton and Spitting Image were a part of popular culture. They were known by the population. These days, who is there?
I can't immediately think of anyone who actually uses politics as the basis of their comedy like Elton and others did back then.

The person who I can think of who is a celebrity and a comic who very clearly states their views on politics (and great views they are too) is Paul O'Grady.

Editing to add: I suppose we've got Armando Ianucci writing / producing stuff like the Thick of It ... which certainly did become part of popular culture. But again, that's not really current now. Another edit. Jo Brand does her bit too. But hardly a newcomer to the comedy scene.
Working on the wild side.
StephenDolan
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3725
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:15 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by StephenDolan »

rebeccariots2 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
adam wrote: I thought Brand's original use of this was excellent, although there was a very good come back in one of the come-backs btw which described Brand as 'A pound-shop Mark Thomas', which I think is a better response. I've come to think that Elton had more of the 'stopped clock' syndrome than any great substance.
Agree or disagree with his/their material choices, Ben Elton and Spitting Image were a part of popular culture. They were known by the population. These days, who is there?
I can't immediately think of anyone who actually uses politics as the basis of their comedy like Elton and others did back then.

The person who I can think of who is a celebrity and a comic who very clearly states their views on politics (and great views they are too) is Paul O'Grady.

Editing to add: I suppose we've got Armando Ianucci writing / producing stuff like the Thick of It ... which certainly did become part of popular culture. But again, that's not really current now. Another edit. Jo Brand does her bit too. But hardly a newcomer to the comedy scene.
Yes AI did, and still is to some extent with Veep.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by Willow904 »

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Oborne on excellent form. I was going to provide a snippet but it really needs reading in its entirety.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... wagon.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Blimey. He doesn't hold back, does he?

This really is the strangest election ever. There have been some comments over at the Guardian about which party the various papers will support in the run-up to the election and no one was able to agree, which is really not surprising when all the papers seem to be suffering from split personalities at the moment. David Cameron may be a Tory "asset" with the undemanding voting public but the for the right-leaning papers he appears to be more of an albatross what with his inconsistency and incompetence continually forcing them to either attack him or apologize for him. Meanwhile the Guardian seems to be sighing with relief as a myriad of non-partisan A&E crisis angles enable them to fill acres of space without taking any kind of political stance beyond sort of not-rightish.

Has an election ever been this open?
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
User avatar
adam
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3210
Joined: Wed 27 Aug, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by adam »

rebeccariots2 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
adam wrote: I thought Brand's original use of this was excellent, although there was a very good come back in one of the come-backs btw which described Brand as 'A pound-shop Mark Thomas', which I think is a better response. I've come to think that Elton had more of the 'stopped clock' syndrome than any great substance.
Agree or disagree with his/their material choices, Ben Elton and Spitting Image were a part of popular culture. They were known by the population. These days, who is there?
I can't immediately think of anyone who actually uses politics as the basis of their comedy like Elton and others did back then.

The person who I can think of who is a celebrity and a comic who very clearly states their views on politics (and great views they are too) is Paul O'Grady.

Editing to add: I suppose we've got Armando Ianucci writing / producing stuff like the Thick of It ... which certainly did become part of popular culture. But again, that's not really current now.
Iannucci is a good example and I think Charlie Brooker is another. A lot of the really good political comedy has been issue based and less direct, rather than more straightforwardly targeted personal satire - as well of the thick of it there was 2012, on bureaucracy and management, and the very wonderful Getting On on the Health Service.
I still believe in a town called Hope
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by Willow904 »

rebeccariots2 wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
adam wrote: I thought Brand's original use of this was excellent, although there was a very good come back in one of the come-backs btw which described Brand as 'A pound-shop Mark Thomas', which I think is a better response. I've come to think that Elton had more of the 'stopped clock' syndrome than any great substance.
Agree or disagree with his/their material choices, Ben Elton and Spitting Image were a part of popular culture. They were known by the population. These days, who is there?
I can't immediately think of anyone who actually uses politics as the basis of their comedy like Elton and others did back then.

The person who I can think of who is a celebrity and a comic who very clearly states their views on politics (and great views they are too) is Paul O'Grady.

Editing to add: I suppose we've got Armando Ianucci writing / producing stuff like the Thick of It ... which certainly did become part of popular culture. But again, that's not really current now. Another edit. Jo Brand does her bit too. But hardly a newcomer to the comedy scene.
I think the earlier reference to Mark Thomas maybe explains why comics are less overtly political these days. Mark Thomas exposed corporate interests - Monsanto, the arms industry - as the biggest threats to ordinary people rather than a specific party and that more closely reflects where we are now with voters distrustful of the whole political system. Personally I preferred Mark Thomas' approach which for me seemed to challenge those who represent us to do better, rather than Russell Brand's which seems to advocate utterly pointless disengagement and unproductive anarchy, but the general point is the same - the enemy is no longer parochial in the shape of the Tories, but global in the shape of a corporate and wealthy elite.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
User avatar
RogerOThornhill
Prime Minister
Posts: 11115
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by RogerOThornhill »

Oh, so that's what she said!

Ukip woman had ‘a problem with negroes because of their faces’

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/poli ... 316972.ece
A Ukip councillor was expelled from the party for allegedly saying that she had a problem with “negroes” because there was “something about their faces,” The Times can reveal.

Rozanne Duncan was kicked out last month after making “jaw-dropping” remarks to a BBC documentary-maker, but both the party and the broadcaster declined to reveal what she had said.
Oops.
If I'm not here, then I'll be in the library. Or the other library.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by citizenJA »

Good-morning, everyone.
Current government are a catastrophe but please, don't let them take us down as they crash.
Don't let the Tory-led coalition government's reactive, irresponsible, crisis-ridden leadership remove our real capacity for better government, less strain, greater creativity, cooperation & more laughter.
55DegreesNorth
Minister of State
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed 27 Aug, 2014 6:13 am

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by 55DegreesNorth »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1133148 ... North.html

The short answer is obviously 'no'. But its an article with some sensible insights.

BTW, Morning folks & Happy New Year.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by citizenJA »

Willow904 wrote:
I think the earlier reference to Mark Thomas maybe explains why comics are less overtly political these days. Mark Thomas exposed corporate interests - Monsanto, the arms industry - as the biggest threats to ordinary people rather than a specific party and that more closely reflects where we are now with voters distrustful of the whole political system. Personally I preferred Mark Thomas' approach which for me seemed to challenge those who represent us to do better, rather than Russell Brand's which seems to advocate utterly pointless disengagement and unproductive anarchy, but the general point is the same - the enemy is no longer parochial in the shape of the Tories, but global in the shape of a corporate and wealthy elite.
Yes; 'challenge those representing us to do better'.
Tories are problem-shaped though, end of. Get them out of government. It matters.
User avatar
TheGrimSqueaker
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2192
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by TheGrimSqueaker »

StephenDolan wrote:One of the criticisms of Ed Balls' "Pound shop Ben Elton" description of Russell Brand was that this shows how out of date Balls is with popular culture if he has to reference an 80s comedian.

Thinking on this, who are the modern equivalents? Ben Elton was not alone, there were multiple figures highlighting the Thatcher years cruelty. The volume of material this coalition would provide for Spitting Image. Where is the political satire? All I see is snidey "politicians are all the same" comments from comedians instead of referencing actual social issues. That's about as far as they'll go.
Precisely. Ed Balls wasn't out of touch, he was simply using the most easily recognisable example of the breed; Ben Elton became a bit of a caricature, he was even perceived as a bit of a joke at the time (I seem to recall a Spitting Image puppet) in much the same way Russell Brand is now - which is probably a little unfair on Brand, because I do thing he has more substance than that. And there are no modern equivalents of Elton, Lee, Hardy, Steel, Thomas or Brand (Jo) partly because, I suspect, there are no modern day equivalents of the TV progs that allowed that sort of thing to thrive; Channel 4 have tried a few things, Stand Up For The Week (but that was killed off in 2014), and seem to have settled on a mixture of Jimmy Carr vehicles and The Last Leg - the latter is probably the best we are going to get.

So any modern day wannabe political standups are reduced to panel shows like Mock The Week, 8 out of 10 Cats and (maybe) a guest slot on Last Leg, none of which will give them the chance to build the momentum that earlier generation had. There are some superb standups around at the moment who've shown the potential on those progs (and SU4TW) to be something more than just another world weary cynic (which is all a slot on those shows gives) - Kevin Bridges, Sara Pascoe, Paul Chowdhry, Romesh Ranganathan and Andrew Lawrence (until his recent idiocy) spring to mind - but the opportunities just aren't there; the two best placed are Josh Widdicombe (but he is too amiable) and Jon Richardson. And, no, I'm not ignoring the likes of Dara and Al, fine comedians who chose a different route; and Patrick Kielty deserves credit for having the balls to make jokes about The Troubles at a time when it could have easily got him killed (especially considering what happened to his father), but he has left that part of him far behind.

We do have two outstanding modern political comedians in this country, and you can bet your bottom dollar neither will be allowed to get into a position where they can really rock the boats; Marcus Brigstocke who, when given his head, can be coruscating but is never allowed more than a guest spot on The Now Show (but when he does that slot ..... oh boy!!); and Francesca Martinez who scares the bejaysus out of the likes of IDS and his mob (all of them, from IDS to Millar when she had McVey's job, ran scared of appearing 'on the sofa' with Chessi) but also confuses conservative commissioning editors.

Saturday Live/Friday Night Live gave us Rik and Ade, now we have Mitchell and Webb; the latter are very funny and very clever, but I miss the danger and edge of the previous generation.
COWER BRIEF MORTALS. HO. HO. HO.
PaulfromYorkshire
Site Admin
Posts: 8329
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:27 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by PaulfromYorkshire »

55DegreesNorth wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1133148 ... North.html

The short answer is obviously 'no'. But its an article with some sensible insights.

BTW, Morning folks & Happy New Year.
And Happy Ny to you too ;-)
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by rebeccariots2 »

en Bradshaw ‏@BenPBradshaw 35m35 minutes ago
Devon lollipop women & men next in line for Government & Devon County Council cuts http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/D ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
The Somerset lollipop women and men were virtually the first to go ... and then they had the nerve to advertise immediately for volunteers to take their places ... and the Chief Exec couldn't understand why people weren't leaping at the chance to fill the roles / jobs of sacked workers.
Working on the wild side.
User avatar
rebeccariots2
Prime Minister
Posts: 14038
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:20 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by rebeccariots2 »

Tessa Jowell ‏@jowellt 5m5 minutes ago
Sickening comments from Nigel Farage. The murder of innocent people is criminal plain and simple. #CharlieHebdo
What has Farage been saying? I dread to think what capital he might try to make of this tragedy.
Working on the wild side.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by citizenJA »

rebeccariots2 wrote:
en Bradshaw ‏@BenPBradshaw 35m35 minutes ago
Devon lollipop women & men next in line for Government & Devon County Council cuts http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/D ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
The Somerset lollipop women and men were virtually the first to go ... and then they had the nerve to advertise immediately for volunteers to take their places ... and the Chief Exec couldn't understand why people weren't leaping at the chance to fill the roles / jobs of sacked workers.
This kind of thing makes me so angry I snarl.

Someone help me out here; I'm beside myself. The lack of shame, the outright horridness, expecting people to work for free is outrageous. It's theft. We're being stolen from.
User avatar
TheGrimSqueaker
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2192
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by TheGrimSqueaker »

rebeccariots2 wrote:Morning all.

Reposting this from HindleA from late last night. The last post in fact. (I can hear a trumpet as I write that.)
HindleA wrote:
A good summing up of the select committee session into the sanction regime.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... vulnerable
From BTL this had me flabbergasted ... JCP checking registers daily.
brannan765
08 January 2015 8:11am
I teach English at a local college to a mixture of local & Job Centre learners that are sent from the Job Centre to gain quals in English, Maths & ICT.
Over the past 2 years I have witnessed some of my learners treated as if they were a piece of meat by the JCP. I do everything I can to support them & have contacted the local Job Centre to stop these ridiculous sanctions.
One lady in my class yest was crying during the lesson as she was in so much pain - I tried to arrange for her to go home but she refused as she didn't want to miss the lesson & get sanctioned.
The Job Centre are now interfering with tutor's jobs to the extent we cannot teach properly anymore. Registers are checked daily & if a learner is ill or has an emergency, they are immediately sanctioned but only discover this fact until much later on when their JSA does not arrive.
I am sick to my stomach of the corrupt, lying, deceitful & arrogant politicians & Job Centre workers who treat other human beings this way. I do everything I can to help my learners but the DWP & Job Centre are making it impossible.
This is an answer to this and your other posts, tying some of my ideas together.

As you say, People are not packages. The gut feel I've got with Burnham (for example) is that he gets that, and that his calls for integration are not about doing it for the sake of saving money in the short term, but realising that proper planning delivers quality care and value for money in the medium/long term; in contrast to the Tories while he is aware of the value even more than the cost.

More controversially I'm beginning to think Reeves might get it too, and the reason for that ties in with that BTL quote you posted;part of the oft- and mis-quoted "Tougher than the Tories" thing revolved around this very subject. She talked at the time about the status quo, about how the sorts of people who are being forced onto these courses, almost as a last resort, and told that they have to do it to avoid being sanctioned; her suggestion is that, instead of using it as a stick to beat somebody who has already been running through the system for months, we should be looking to offer help (her word) quickly, within weeks, to people who are not able to effectively get into the job market because of literacy and numeracy issues - in other words, treating them like a human being and not a simply as a problem. There are glimmers of this kind of thing throughout many of her speeches and policy announcements, although possibly not enough; but I'm growing more inclined to offer her the benefit of the doubt. I may well be alone in that of course. :D
COWER BRIEF MORTALS. HO. HO. HO.
User avatar
RogerOThornhill
Prime Minister
Posts: 11115
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:18 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by RogerOThornhill »

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Tessa Jowell ‏@jowellt 5m5 minutes ago
Sickening comments from Nigel Farage. The murder of innocent people is criminal plain and simple. #CharlieHebdo
What has Farage been saying? I dread to think what capital he might try to make of this tragedy.

Farage Blames Multiculturalism For Paris Shootings

http://www.lbc.co.uk/farage-blames-mult ... ngs-102921


:toss:
If I'm not here, then I'll be in the library. Or the other library.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by Willow904 »

RogerOThornhill wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
Tessa Jowell ‏@jowellt 5m5 minutes ago
Sickening comments from Nigel Farage. The murder of innocent people is criminal plain and simple. #CharlieHebdo
What has Farage been saying? I dread to think what capital he might try to make of this tragedy.

Farage Blames Multiculturalism For Paris Shootings

http://www.lbc.co.uk/farage-blames-mult ... ngs-102921


:toss:
Taking complex events and ideas and boiling them down to a reason why we should leave the EU and control immigration is Farage's only trick but on this occasion it's rather distasteful, isn't it? Couldn't he have left the politicking at home just this once?
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

Disgusted by the Guardian this morning, opening comments on the Charlie Hebdo tragedy to allow all sorts of extremists access to the media with their provocations and hatred.

Just what is needed the day after a disgusting terrorist attack.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by citizenJA »

mikems wrote:Disgusted by the Guardian this morning, opening comments on the Charlie Hebdo tragedy to allow all sorts of extremists access to the media with their provocations and hatred.

Just what is needed the day after a disgusting terrorist attack.
Agreed, thank you for writing better than I'm able.

Next to that, I say it's hard to absorb all the crisis, tragedy, ongoing difficult, ordinary, horror. What am I supposed to do with it all? Change what I can, help where I'm able, try not to make anything worse.
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

Ofcom's absurd decision re the Greens is something for the tories to have fun with. On the one hand they can sneer at the Greens for not being big or influential enough to be included, on the other they can use it as an excuse for why Dave's 'principles' won't let him do a TV debate.

Which will they choose?
User avatar
TechnicalEphemera
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by TechnicalEphemera »

mikems wrote:Ofcom's absurd decision re the Greens is something for the tories to have fun with. On the one hand they can sneer at the Greens for not being big or influential enough to be included, on the other they can use it as an excuse for why Dave's 'principles' won't let him do a TV debate.

Which will they choose?
I have no issue with Ofcom's decision, it was fairly technocratic and well argued. They certainly do not have a political agenda.

More amusing was the view you only have to offer Candidates a place in a debate, which surely means the BBC can empty chair Dave if he doesn't play.
Release the Guardvarks.
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

TE :'They certainly do not have a political agenda.'

This strikes me as naive and not a claim that can be made with any degree of certainty, given the society we live in.

All of its upper staff will have been recruited on the basis of conforming to expectations, connections to important and influential people and, occasionally, ability.

Investigation would probably reveal the higher levels are from a private school background and went to Oxbridge. I expect that many of them are personal friends of people in government, other regulators and quangos.

They may not have explicit political bias - but then again they may - but they certainly will share the biases of the ruling class. If they didn't they simply wouldn't be where they are making the decisions they are making.

In any case Ofcom was set up as a regulator by the Thatcher govt, and it was a deeply political act, as were all that government's actions.
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

And why is Ofcom, the regulator of broadcasting, given this responsibility? It is a decision about democracy, yet Ofcom itself is not accountable to us in any meaningful way.
User avatar
TechnicalEphemera
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by TechnicalEphemera »

mikems wrote:TE :'They certainly do not have a political agenda.'

This strikes me as naive and not a claim that can be made with any degree of certainty, given the society we live in.

All of its upper staff will have been recruited on the basis of conforming to expectations, connections to important and influential people and, occasionally, ability.

Investigation would probably reveal the higher levels are from a private school background and went to Oxbridge. I expect that many of them are personal friends of people in government, other regulators and quangos.

They may not have explicit political bias - but then again they may - but they certainly will share the biases of the ruling class. If they didn't they simply wouldn't be where they are making the decisions they are making.

In any case Ofcom was set up as a regulator by the Thatcher govt, and it was a deeply political act, as were all that government's actions.
I have worked with Ofcom and know a number of their people, so I feel reasonably qualified to make that judgement. Their biggest concern will have been applying the existing rules in a way that would stand up to legal challenge.

If they redefine 1 MP and single digit support as a major party then they would have to live with the consequences of doing so. Respect would have an excellent case, for example as might the BNP or EDL in the future.
Release the Guardvarks.
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

The whole situation is absurd. If a party organises nationally and aims to stand in a sufficient number of seats they should get the same treatment as all the rest. Making rules about democracy on the basis of avoiding being sued is craziness, not to say profoundly undemocratic.

I'm sure the inidividuals working in Ofcom as as decent and honest as any one else, but as with Andrew Marr in his interview with Chomsky, they are where they are because of their ideological accommodation with the current establishment, not for their individual integrity or honesty,
AnatolyKasparov
Prime Minister
Posts: 15626
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:26 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by AnatolyKasparov »

Suzanne Moore is very good today (something I haven't said much before and likely won't again, but credit where it is due)

In particular, she is spot on in identifying the Rushdie controversy as a key moment when a large part of the "liberal-left" started to go wrong.
"IS TONTY BLAIR BEHIND THIS???!!!!111???!!!"
User avatar
TechnicalEphemera
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by TechnicalEphemera »

mikems wrote:The whole situation is absurd. If a party organises nationally and aims to stand in a sufficient number of seats they should get the same treatment as all the rest. Making rules about democracy on the basis of avoiding being sued is craziness, not to say profoundly undemocratic.

I'm sure the inidividuals working in Ofcom as as decent and honest as any one else, but as with Andrew Marr in his interview with Chomsky, they are where they are because of their ideological accommodation with the current establishment, not for their individual integrity or honesty,
Right, so logically in 1997 The Natural Law party would qualify as a major party, as well as the BNP and of course The Monster Raving Loony party.
Release the Guardvarks.
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

Right, so logically in 1997 The Natural Law party would qualify as a major party, as well as the BNP and of course The Monster Raving Loony party.
Well, yes. But the Monster Raving Loony Party does not organise nationally and would not stand in many seats. The Natural Law party was a bit of a one-off campaign, so perhaps would not qualify as a nationally organised party. But UKIP/BNP are going to be in these debates, so that point is moot.

Personally, I regret the whole thing ever got started. It personalises poltiics and allows the media more power over the outcome by delivering its own biased judgements on the debates. But if we must have them, all should be included who qualify as proper parties representing real sections of opinion, no matter how awful they may be.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by Willow904 »

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
mikems wrote:The whole situation is absurd. If a party organises nationally and aims to stand in a sufficient number of seats they should get the same treatment as all the rest. Making rules about democracy on the basis of avoiding being sued is craziness, not to say profoundly undemocratic.

I'm sure the inidividuals working in Ofcom as as decent and honest as any one else, but as with Andrew Marr in his interview with Chomsky, they are where they are because of their ideological accommodation with the current establishment, not for their individual integrity or honesty,
Right, so logically in 1997 The Natural Law party would qualify as a major party, as well as the BNP and of course The Monster Raving Loony party.
I think the main point is that if TV companies want to hold debates with Ukip but without the Green Party, Ofcom's opinion is that this would be acceptable within the political balance rules and the evidence they have produced to back their opinion is not unreasonable. It in no way stops TV companies from including the Greens if they choose to and their choosing not to still mostly reflects unfavourably on them. The interesting question is whether David Cameron will continue to use the supposed unfairness of including Ukip and not the Greens as an excuse to dodge the debates.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
ohsocynical
Prime Minister
Posts: 10937
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:10 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by ohsocynical »

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Oborne on excellent form. I was going to provide a snippet but it really needs reading in its entirety.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... wagon.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
What a hard hitting article. Best I've read for a long, long time.
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. – Aesop
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by HindleA »

"Government plan to speed up payments to small firms backfires"

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

"The report also found government officials were unable to locate the original papers setting out the policy objectives, estimated costs and benefits of the five-day prompt payment commitment"
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

Just thought I'd share this after we had the Liberation link yesterday. L'Huma :

http://www.humanite.fr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by HindleA »

Martin Rowson:"We must not stop laughing at these murderous clowns"


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... CMP=twt_gu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
TechnicalEphemera
Speaker of the House
Posts: 2967
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:21 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by TechnicalEphemera »

Willow904 wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote:
mikems wrote:The whole situation is absurd. If a party organises nationally and aims to stand in a sufficient number of seats they should get the same treatment as all the rest. Making rules about democracy on the basis of avoiding being sued is craziness, not to say profoundly undemocratic.

I'm sure the inidividuals working in Ofcom as as decent and honest as any one else, but as with Andrew Marr in his interview with Chomsky, they are where they are because of their ideological accommodation with the current establishment, not for their individual integrity or honesty,
Right, so logically in 1997 The Natural Law party would qualify as a major party, as well as the BNP and of course The Monster Raving Loony party.
I think the main point is that if TV companies want to hold debates with Ukip but without the Green Party, Ofcom's opinion is that this would be acceptable within the political balance rules and the evidence they have produced to back their opinion is not unreasonable. It in no way stops TV companies from including the Greens if they choose to and their choosing not to still mostly reflects unfavourably on them. The interesting question is whether David Cameron will continue to use the supposed unfairness of including Ukip and not the Greens as an excuse to dodge the debates.
My reading of their ruling is no he cannot. They will offer him a place at the table, he has the option not to take it, but he cannot veto it. There is certainly a strong hint that way.
Release the Guardvarks.
WelshIan
Committee Member
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu 23 Oct, 2014 1:22 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by WelshIan »

Happy New Year everyone!

This talk of the election TV debates reminded me of the Bite the Ballot Leaders Live interviews. David Cameron still hasn't confirmed a date:
http://bitetheballot.co.uk/leaders-live/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've emailed them to see if he's going to take part.
User avatar
refitman
Site Admin
Posts: 7692
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:22 pm
Location: Wombwell, United Kingdom

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by refitman »

TechnicalEphemera wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
TechnicalEphemera wrote: Right, so logically in 1997 The Natural Law party would qualify as a major party, as well as the BNP and of course The Monster Raving Loony party.
I think the main point is that if TV companies want to hold debates with Ukip but without the Green Party, Ofcom's opinion is that this would be acceptable within the political balance rules and the evidence they have produced to back their opinion is not unreasonable. It in no way stops TV companies from including the Greens if they choose to and their choosing not to still mostly reflects unfavourably on them. The interesting question is whether David Cameron will continue to use the supposed unfairness of including Ukip and not the Greens as an excuse to dodge the debates.
My reading of their ruling is no he cannot. They will offer him a place at the table, he has the option not to take it, but he cannot veto it. There is certainly a strong hint that way.
Tub of Lard? Or bucket of scarlet paint?
mikems
Minister of State
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 12:47 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by mikems »

Can't the tories argue that before the first debates the Prime Minister did have a veto, which was exercised by every PM up to Gordon Brown? It would leave Empty looking like a massive hypocrite, but who is going to call him on it?
StephenDolan
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3725
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 10:15 pm

Re: Thursday 8th January 2015

Post by StephenDolan »

mikems wrote:Can't the tories argue that before the first debates the Prime Minister did have a veto, which was exercised by every PM up to Gordon Brown? It would leave Empty looking like a massive hypocrite, but who is going to call him on it?
Genie is out the bottle. The media want these debates to happen, so in some form they'll probably happen. Crosby will be pushing to have comfortable topics concentrated on. The economy, Europe and immigration front and centre. So says my 2ps worth. :wink:
Locked