Tuesday 3rd February 2015

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 4:42 am

Morning.
Following up on Ephemerid's post yesterday:
Just linking the Public and Commercial Services Union's evidence to tbe DWP select committee,regarding the inquiry into sanctions.Irrefutably evidence of targets;pressure put on staff;financial inducements/rewards;charts heralding how much is saved by doing so -it is all there.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... sanctions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And in memory of Lucy Glennon RIP,a link to her Guardian articles

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

Edited to add,re-reading them I see many of us evident in the comments.

Post by **refitman** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 7:20 am

Morning. Labour lead at 2 points on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 2nd February -

Con 33%, (-1)
Lab 35%, (+1)
LD 7%, (+1)
UKIP 14%, (nc)
GRN 6% (-1)

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 7:33 am

norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 45 mins45 minutes ago
Labour dismiss latest batch of business leaders attacking Ed M as part of "a Tory Operation." Stuart Rose -Tory Peer;Nigel Rudd - Tory donor

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 7:35 am

"PAC report into the financial sustainability of NHS bodies"

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... quiry=1944" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Summary
The financial health of NHS bodies has worsened in the last two financial years. The overall net surplus achieved by NHS bodies in 2012-13 of £2.1 billion fell to £722 million in 2013-14. The percentage of NHS trusts and foundation trusts in deficit increased from 10% in 2012-13 to 26% in 2013-14. Monitor found that 80% of foundation trusts that provide acute hospital services were reporting a deficit by the second quarter of 2014-15. NHS England, Monitor and the NHS Trust Development Authority recognise that radical change is needed to the way services are provided and that extra resources are required if the NHS is to become financially sustainable. The necessary changes will require further upfront investment. Present incentives to reduce A&E attendance and increase community based care services have not had the impact expected. New incentives and strong relationships are needed to promote the more effective collaboration necessary for delivering new models of care.

Burnham response
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1099250 ... s-finances" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

DonutHingeParty · Post by **DonutHingeParty** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 7:40 am

Morning. Daily Mail juxtaposition of the day:

(Tory peer) Stuart Rose says Labour will take Britain back to the seventies.

Man who invented the Pill described as "Man who made it hard for women to say no to sex." Because God forbid a woman should have any other reason not to have sex with a man other than fear of pregnancy.

55DegreesNorth · Post by **55DegreesNorth** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 7:59 am

Morning folks,
An unusually honest description of the impact of austerity on Newcastle, in the Telegraph. No comments available, naturally.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -cuts.html

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 8:41 am

"English votes for English Laws:What are the Tories proposing?"

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

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 8:48 am

Tim Montgomerie ن ‏@montie 18m18 minutes ago
I have no idea what Hague's English vote proposal means. He seems to have turned an election winning theme into a messy compromise #r4today

Morning peeps. Got a feeling it's going to be wun of them daze.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 8:49 am

DonutHingeParty wrote:Morning. Daily Mail juxtaposition of the day:

(Tory peer) Stuart Rose says Labour will take Britain back to the seventies.

Thought he'd be happy with that, M & S were a successful company then.

Morning all.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 8:57 am

Matt Chorley ‏@MattChorley 1m1 minute ago
Struggling with heating costs? Eat a packed lunch to save money to pay your bills, says Ofgem http://dailym.ai/1uT8d6e" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How many assumptions there are evident in that bit of ultra patronising and dismissive advice.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:15 am

Morning all.

First sign of snow this winter round our way - not much though -and all the kids going down to the school are really excited and collecting snow from the roofs of cars.

Good to see them firing up the ~~mid range saloons~~usual Tory business chiefs to rubbish Labour - the election is underway. Can't help thinking it's a bit early with 3 months to go...

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:16 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Matt Chorley ‏@MattChorley 1m1 minute ago
Struggling with heating costs? Eat a packed lunch to save money to pay your bills, says Ofgem http://dailym.ai/1uT8d6e" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
How many assumptions there are evident in that bit of ultra patronising and dismissive advice.

Good graph. Energy companies do appear to be taking a bigger slice of profit in recent years. Also their hedging strategies appear to be poor value as dips in price don't appear to be smoothing out the spikes.

As for Ofgem, this advice appears to be well outside their remit. Who put them up to it? Sandwiches? What's that got to do with anything? Even if someone treats themselves to a full pub lunch everyday, they still have the right to expect Ofgem to ensure their energy bills are fair and transparent and they're not being ripped off by a sector that, without tough regulation, could easily turn into a cartel.

Ed Miliband's energy price freeze and sector reform, with a new regulator fit for purpose, is looking more necessary than ever.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:17 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Matt Chorley ‏@MattChorley 1m1 minute ago
Struggling with heating costs? Eat a packed lunch to save money to pay your bills, says Ofgem http://dailym.ai/1uT8d6e" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
How many assumptions there are evident in that bit of ultra patronising and dismissive advice.

Perish the thought that not everybody has the energy company profits as their top priority. (Isn't Ofgem supposed to stand up for consumers, not the suppliers)?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:19 am

Britain’s epidemic of private despair makes this an economic crisis like no other
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... sis-public

Really good piece from Aditya Chakrabortty. This is one of the most penetrating paras I've read for quite some time.

Inequality and insecure jobs aren’t new; they have simply been heightened since Cameron and Osborne moved into Downing Street. The chancellor who promised we were all in it together has specialised in fiscal divide and rule; the Conservative who hates picking winners in industrial strategy has been expert at picking losers in his budgetary strategy. So it is that the Institute for Fiscal Studies reports that “lower-income groups will fare considerably worse over the post-recession period”. Or that Simon Duffy at the Centre for Welfare Reform calculates that people with disabilities have been hit nine times harder than the rest of the population by austerity; those with severe disabilities 19 times harder.

BTL there are commenters who seem in complete denial that this is happening to anyone, anywhere - because they and their parents and their neighbours are alright.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:21 am

A businessman is not necessarily an economist and vice versa.

Tristram Hunt and Emily Thornberry: compare and contrast. Whose offence was the more serious?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:27 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.

First sign of snow this winter round our way - not much though -and all the kids going down to the school are really excited and collecting snow from the roofs of cars.

Good to see them firing up the ~~mid range saloons~~usual Tory business chiefs to rubbish Labour - the election is underway. Can't help thinking it's a bit early with 3 months to go...

We had our first proper snow yesterday. It's frozen hard today - as are our water butts (not our running water supply though, thankfully as we have a small heating bar on in the water treating shed). Of course, yesterday would also be the day the Rayburn decided to completely smoke us out - we actually had to open a window in the kitchen because I was so worried about the fumes and my stinging eyes. So today we've let it go out ..... and Mr Riots is up on the roof with his Rayburn chimney cleaning kit - wearing 2 or 3 sets of everything. We hope to have normal service resumed in a couple of hours. Meanwhile the woodburner has been lit for the first time in 2 years to keep some heat in part of the house.

I will though be having a packed lunch - I'll make sure to put it in a tupperware container for 10 minutes before eating it - so I comply with the Ofgem advice to make sure I know how to save money (like a good pleb) so I can pay the exorbitant energy bill as my absolute first priority.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:33 am

PoliticsHome ‏@politicshome 17m17 minutes ago
Boris Johnson on Boots being located in Switzerland to avoid tax: "He’s doing his best by his shareholders and the interests of his company"

Hillingdon ... you have been warned. Think very hard about what you want in an MP .... is this it? Really?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:35 am

Warwick Mansell reporting that E Act have indicated that they're not thinking of expanding any longer after losing 10 schools last year.

http://www.theguardian.com/education/20 ... les-ofsted

And in the past?

Less than four years ago, Sir Bruce Liddington, then the grandly-titled “director general” of London-based E-Act, said he wanted the chain to have 200 academies and 50 free schools.

Where on earth does Cameron think he is going to find sponsors for 3,000 more schools given that they're struggling to get new sponsors in even now?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 9:45 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:Warwick Mansell reporting that E Act have indicated that they're not thinking of expanding any longer after losing 10 schools last year.

http://www.theguardian.com/education/20 ... les-ofsted

And in the past?

Less than four years ago, Sir Bruce Liddington, then the grandly-titled “director general” of London-based E-Act, said he wanted the chain to have 200 academies and 50 free schools.
Where on earth does Cameron think he is going to find sponsors for 3,000 more schools given that they're struggling to get new sponsors in even now?

He doesn't - think - that is.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:00 am

Stephen Bush ‏@stephenkb 1h1 hour ago London, England
Brass neck of the month: David Laws advising Labour against "populist" policies on tuition fees.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:05 am

Here's the analysis of chains and schools.

Range.......Sponsors....Schools
>20................14..........486
11-20.............22..........295
6-10...............50..........373
2-5...............337..........941
1................2149.........2149
Total..........................4244

So over half of academies are actually single school trusts or converter academies not in a multi-academy trust. And a further 20% or so in MATs of 2-5 schools.

They have no hope of achieving this. Given that his speech seemed to consist of this and a real cut in school income, that wasn't one of his best efforts.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:10 am

Paul Mason ‏@paulmasonnews 11h11 hours ago
Ppl fwiw - http://www.channel4.com/news/yanis-varo ... days-video" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … - having started today feeling v similar to @SpiegelPeter I now think Greece close to deal on debt and ELA

Lightacandle ‏@lightacandleOTM 11h11 hours ago
@paulmasonnews @SpiegelPeter From the interview I think he was saying from his next meetings in Italy, Germany and then EC deal cld be done.

‏@paulmasonnews
@lightacandleOTM yup

If that proves to be the case - that's some outcome. The coalition could actually learn valuable lessons from Greece - but in an entirely different way than they have always preached. Cameron should try and pick up a few negotiation skills ... and Osborne might be able to work out why he's the one who gets booed at the Paralympics and his Greek counterpart is the one everyone wants to succeed in his endeavours.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:19 am

HindleA wrote:Morning.
Following up on Ephemerid's post yesterday:
Just linking the Public and Commercial Services Union's evidence to tbe DWP select committee,regarding the inquiry into sanctions.Irrefutably evidence of targets;pressure put on staff;financial inducements/rewards;charts heralding how much is saved by doing so -it is all there.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... sanctions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And in memory of Lucy Glennon RIP,a link to her Guardian articles

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

Edited to add,re-reading them I see many of us evident in the comments.

Thanks for these, A.

Targets - let's just remind ourselves of what they actually mean.

JCP advisers are under severe pressure to refer as many claimants as possible for sanction. Despite a large proportion of those being inappropriate (as shown by Decision Makers historically rejecting at least half of them) they have to do it anyway or face discipline.
The DMs were clearly the spanner in the works as they insisted on applying the legislation properly; so now they get a target to impose a sanction disallowance on 80% of all cases that come their way, irrespective of legality and irrespective of circumstances.
The DMs were also allowing too many Mandatory Considerations of Review as well, ie. restoring benefits on proper investigation of what were duff referrals, so that had to stop too; they must now impose a sanction on 80% of cases irrespective of legality etc.

These targets mean that of all people sanctioned or challenging any entitlement decision (eg. post WCA) while claiming JSA, ESA, or Income Support, only 20% of them will get that sanction reversed; if they ask for MCR, only 20% of them will have benefit restored.
The total number of people sanctioned and/or challenging decisions is MORE than a million a year. Only a fifth of those people will be awarded any benefit at all. The remaining 800,000 will have nothing. THIS IS NOW DWP POLICY. Bear in mind that of 1.9 million people sanctioned in the past 4 years, 1.6 million of them neither found work nor claimed another benefit. They just disappeared.
The JSA claimant count as measured by the ONS in December 2014 was 0.87 million - a million people were sanctioned and would not appear in the figures, the true picture of unemployment is higher. The ONS has unemployment at 1.91 Million for the same period.

The claimant count of all people on JSA, ESA, and IS combined is currently about 5 million. Of those, 4.5 million are subject to jobsearch conditionality and the remainder are subject to various reassessments of their capability for work.
At some point, nearly all of those people are more likely than not to be referred for a sanction or given an entitlement decision which they may want to challenge. With a built-in failure rate of 80% most of them will lose benefit if only for a short time.

This is a deliberate strategy to reduce the number of people who can claim benefits for any appreciable length of time. And it's working.

Lucy - Yes, I re-read her articles. They really were very good.
As well as some of us being there BTL there are a few folks who don't post at the G any more.
Quite a few - like Fainche - and I'd forgotten how many have gone since the G brought in threading etc. and they're losing many more with the Beta nonsense too.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:34 am

ephemerid wrote:
HindleA wrote:Morning.
Following up on Ephemerid's post yesterday:
Just linking the Public and Commercial Services Union's evidence to tbe DWP select committee,regarding the inquiry into sanctions.Irrefutably evidence of targets;pressure put on staff;financial inducements/rewards;charts heralding how much is saved by doing so -it is all there.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commi ... sanctions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And in memory of Lucy Glennon RIP,a link to her Guardian articles

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

Edited to add,re-reading them I see many of us evident in the comments.

Thanks for these, A.

Targets - let's just remind ourselves of what they actually mean.

JCP advisers are under severe pressure to refer as many claimants as possible for sanction. Despite a large proportion of those being inappropriate (as shown by Decision Makers historically rejecting at least half of them) they have to do it anyway or face discipline.
The DMs were clearly the spanner in the works as they insisted on applying the legislation properly; so now they get a target to impose a sanction disallowance on 80% of all cases that come their way, irrespective of legality and irrespective of circumstances.
The DMs were also allowing too many Mandatory Considerations of Review as well, ie. restoring benefits on proper investigation of what were duff referrals, so that had to stop too; they must now impose a sanction on 80% of cases irrespective of legality etc.

These targets mean that of all people sanctioned or challenging any entitlement decision (eg. post WCA) while claiming JSA, ESA, or Income Support, only 20% of them will get that sanction reversed; if they ask for MCR, only 20% of them will have benefit restored.
The total number of people sanctioned and/or challenging decisions is MORE than a million a year. Only a fifth of those people will be awarded any benefit at all. The remaining 800,000 will have nothing. THIS IS NOW DWP POLICY. Bear in mind that of 1.9 million people sanctioned in the past 4 years, 1.6 million of them neither found work nor claimed another benefit. They just disappeared.
The JSA claimant count as measured by the ONS in December 2014 was 0.87 million - a million people were sanctioned and would not appear in the figures, the true picture of unemployment is higher. The ONS has unemployment at 1.91 Million for the same period.

The claimant count of all people on JSA, ESA, and IS combined is currently about 5 million. Of those, 4.5 million are subject to jobsearch conditionality and the remainder are subject to various reassessments of their capability for work.
At some point, nearly all of those people are more likely than not to be referred for a sanction or given an entitlement decision which they may want to challenge. With a built-in failure rate of 80% most of them will lose benefit if only for a short time.

This is a deliberate strategy to reduce the number of people who can claim benefits for any appreciable length of time. And it's working.

Lucy - Yes, I re-read her articles. They really were very good.
As well as some of us being there BTL there are a few folks who don't post at the G any more.
Quite a few - like Fainche - and I'd forgotten how many have gone since the G brought in threading etc. and they're losing many more with the Beta nonsense too.

Fainche. That is a voice I have not heard in too long a time, and have resigned myself to the fact that I may never do so again.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:34 am

Andy Sawford MP ‏@AndySawfordMP 3m3 minutes ago
Just read the papers (mostly owned by billionaires) and it seems a lot of extremely rich people are backing the Tories

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:42 am

Faisal Islam retweeted
Alan Strange @AlanStrangeSky · 19h 19 hours ago
Well done Insaf Abbas who flummoxed the @David_Cameron with her question about why tampons should be taxed. PM: 'I'll get back to you'.

Faisal Islam @faisalislam · 13h 13 hours ago
PM's office did get back to our young #asktheleaders voter Insaf on issue of VAT on tampons. it's an EU issue. Put it in the renegotiation?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:43 am

Tee hee...

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:44 am

Wales to provide funds for a drug for patients with leukaemia, after all other treatments have failed.

http://wales.gov.uk/newsroom/healthands ... g/?lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Found this, from last September, worth a look for those of us living here, in Wales.

http://wales.gov.uk/newsroom/healthands ... u/?lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tish · Post by **Tish** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:46 am

I love this article in the Telegraph - Business leaders are reaching for the smelling salts, appalled that Ed Miliband is resorting to "personal attacks" on them, as it risks stifling debate and shutting down legitimate discussions of policies

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

Maybe they should have a word with their friends in the Tory party, the people who've spent four years going "don't vote for him, he's funny looking. And his dad was a commie. And he can't eat a sandwich properly." I haven't noticed much legitimate discussion of policies coming from them.

Personally I think all these tax dodging billionaires lining up to have a pop at Ed is terrific. The real battle for Labour this time isn't winning over Middle England floating voters in the South, its convincing those thinking of voting Green or SNP that Labour does offer a real alternative to the Tories. The more the likes of Stuart Rose clutch their handbags in horror at Ed's pretty gentle attempts to move power away from big business back to the people the better.

Edited for spelling

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:54 am

I think (hope ?) the Cons have got it wrong in wheeling out these 'big guns' to criticise Labour for responding to Stefano Pessina.

There is a reason people were gluing their hands to the windows of Boots stores across the country & it isn't because Boots paid too much in tax ! Similarly, Tesco et al were (still are ?) boycotted for their use of workfare.

People are fed up at the imbalance between those with the spondoolicks & the rest of us that don't.

People are nowadays prepared to say enough is enough - pay your dues or put up with the consequences.

These business leaders may find out just exactly how pissed off people are to their cost.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:56 am

The next front in Cameron's 'War on Wales' has been launched - by Stephen Crabb our waste of space Secretary of State for Wales and MP for Preseli Pembs - no less.

Labour 'has screwed up' education in Wales just as it did with NHS, says Tory minister in attack on 'woeful' Welsh schools
Stephen Crabb will say Labour's education record in Wales is a scandal
Welsh Secretary believes that Labour have 'screwed up' on education
Comes as Oxbridge applications from Wales fall to lowest for 10 years
4% of schools in Wales are rated 'excellent' compared to 29% in England
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... oeful.html

I would have thought Crabb's job as SoS for Wales might include constructively representing Wales ... doesn't look like it from his contributions so far. I fail to see how attacks like this will boost confidence in employers and businesses thinking about investing in Wales.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:57 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
PoliticsHome ‏@politicshome 17m17 minutes ago
Boris Johnson on Boots being located in Switzerland to avoid tax: "He’s doing his best by his shareholders and the interests of his company"
Hillingdon ... you have been warned. Think very hard about what you want in an MP .... is this it? Really?

The fool has since said he finds ''it disappointing Boots don't cough up for Britain'' doesn't know his arse from his elbow.

But he's a loveable buffoon and that's all that matters.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 10:59 am

Ian Dunt ‏@IanDunt 18m18 minutes ago
Next time I go to Boots I might ask the person behind the till: 'And you? Any views on how I should vote?'

Ian Dunt ‏@IanDunt 19m19 minutes ago
I mean, they sell soap and tampons.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:01 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:
PoliticsHome ‏@politicshome 17m17 minutes ago
Boris Johnson on Boots being located in Switzerland to avoid tax: "He’s doing his best by his shareholders and the interests of his company"
Hillingdon ... you have been warned. Think very hard about what you want in an MP .... is this it? Really?

Let's be honest, BoJo will be elected for his present seat even if he is found b***ering a dead sheep.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:04 am

We have polling that shows what people think of Labour & big business:

We would like you to think about the Labour party and the
sort of policies and direction the party takes. Below are
three pairs of statements, in each case please say which
one you would prefer.

a) A Labour party that is positive about big business, supporting
British business and encouraging investment from abroad

Total 23 % (Con 41 Lab 18 LD 27 Ukip 20)

or

b) A Labour party that does more to stand up to big business,
supporting ordinary people against over powerful corporations

Total 49 & (Con 23 Lab 70 LD 52 Ukip 47)

so a clear majority of those polled want Labour to stand up to big business & support ordinary people against corporations.

http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/d ... ebsite.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:08 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
PoliticsHome ‏@politicshome 17m17 minutes ago
Boris Johnson on Boots being located in Switzerland to avoid tax: "He’s doing his best by his shareholders and the interests of his company"
Hillingdon ... you have been warned. Think very hard about what you want in an MP .... is this it? Really?
Let's be honest, BoJo will be elected for his present seat even if he is found b***ering a dead sheep.

Oh I say - steady on there. Dead is a step too far.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:10 am

rebeccariots2 wrote:The next front in Cameron's 'War on Wales' has been launched - by Stephen Crabb our waste of space Secretary of State for Wales and MP for Preseli Pembs - no less.

Labour 'has screwed up' education in Wales just as it did with NHS, says Tory minister in attack on 'woeful' Welsh schools
Stephen Crabb will say Labour's education record in Wales is a scandal
Welsh Secretary believes that Labour have 'screwed up' on education
Comes as Oxbridge applications from Wales fall to lowest for 10 years
4% of schools in Wales are rated 'excellent' compared to 29% in England
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... oeful.html
I would have thought Crabb's job as SoS for Wales might include constructively representing Wales ... doesn't look like it from his contributions so far. I fail to see how attacks like this will boost confidence in employers and businesses thinking about investing in Wales.

Crabb is more concerned about garnering English votes than doing anything here, Wales for the Tory is the bogey man of modern politics, our NHS is pitted against the English NHS, when it is compared to say the north east it compares favourably, an area with similarities, parents in Wales who think their children are doing well in school, patients who have had good care will think ''what's he on about'' but as someone said to me recently, the attacks are not meant for them, they are for the English and their votes.

Personally, I hate this pitting against one another, systems and regions, one of the negative consequences of devolution I guess.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:18 am

''The Tory attacks are failing, and they don't seem to know what to do about it''

And breathe! I have been as downbeat as anyone, but this piece makes a few valid points.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/02 ... hange-cour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:18 am

frightful_oik wrote:A businessman is not necessarily an economist and vice versa.

Tristram Hunt and Emily Thornberry: compare and contrast. Whose offence was the more serious?

Well, does Hunt have previous on that sort of thing? Thornberry (regrettably) did.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:25 am

Having got over my hissy fit with Roy Lilley publishing blatantly incorrect information the other day, I was surprised to read todays offering in which he mentions a few 'factoids' such as:

*Before the financial crisis Labour was borrowing less than the Major government in 1997
*The world-wide recession, in 38 countries, was not caused because Labour spent too much on schools and hospitals.
*The present government, in the last 5 years, is responsible for £517bn of the trillion+ accumulated public debt compared to the £472bn accrued during 33 years of a Labour led Britain.
*There were two years of budget surplus under Mrs T and four under Mr Blair.
*UK debt grows at £5,170 per second.
*Both debt and borrowing are up.
*It is not correct for the Prime Minister to say we are paying down Britain's debt.
*The economy was growing at 2.6%pa. The latest figures reveal 0.5%.
*The turbulence in the Eurozone and elsewhere may make our goods more expensive and potential customers may have less money to buy from us.

he ends this unusual piece (for him) by saying:

The NHS commands about 9.3% of GDP and the EU-15 average is 9.9%. An average that includes countries facing austerity, just like us and some places worse. To ease the pressures Tarzan wants a gargantuan step change in NHS productivity to 3%. Historically we've managed 1.5%.

My guess is, if asked, even people like Bill would pay a bit more in taxes, hypothecated for use by the NHS exclusively, to give it some headroom; but not to pay down debt.

The problem is; no one is asking.

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com ... ae52733d3a" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:28 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:The next front in Cameron's 'War on Wales' has been launched - by Stephen Crabb our waste of space Secretary of State for Wales and MP for Preseli Pembs - no less.

Labour 'has screwed up' education in Wales just as it did with NHS, says Tory minister in attack on 'woeful' Welsh schools
Stephen Crabb will say Labour's education record in Wales is a scandal
Welsh Secretary believes that Labour have 'screwed up' on education
Comes as Oxbridge applications from Wales fall to lowest for 10 years
4% of schools in Wales are rated 'excellent' compared to 29% in England
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... oeful.html
I would have thought Crabb's job as SoS for Wales might include constructively representing Wales ... doesn't look like it from his contributions so far. I fail to see how attacks like this will boost confidence in employers and businesses thinking about investing in Wales.

Crabb is more concerned about garnering English votes than doing anything here, Wales for the Tory is the bogey man of modern politics, our NHS is pitted against the English NHS, when it is compared to say the north east it compares favourably, an area with similarities, parents in Wales who think their children are doing well in school, patients who have had good care will think ''what's he on about'' but as someone said to me recently, the attacks are not meant for them, they are for the English and their votes.

Personally, I hate this pitting against one another, systems and regions, one of the negative consequences of devolution I guess.

You're right letsskip. But I also have to think about Crabb in respect of him fighting his own seat here. He's got two campaigns to think about - his Tory anti Wales campaign (because we are a socialist shit hole) and the one on his own turf. We have some interesting times ahead of us here in Pembs.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:32 am

Morning All

Just to repeat a plea I made the other day. Would anyone else like to take on my Tweeting duties for a while?

Two reasons really. One is new work patterns that mean I can't hop on and off Twitter so easily.

Second, I am campaigning all out for Labour in my home constituency. I've always tried to be non-tribal when Tweeting for FTN, just generally anti-Coalition, but will find it harder and harder in the heat of the campaign.

Just DM me, Refitman or Ohsocynical for the sign on if you can help

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:32 am

You do Rebecca, and reading your posts you seem to have a good bunch of foot soldiers stomping around the highways and by-ways.

Crabb I reckon is in for a bit of a time of it.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:40 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning All

Just to repeat a plea I made the other day. Would anyone else like to take on my Tweeting duties for a while?

Two reasons really. One is new work patterns that mean I can't hop on and off Twitter so easily.

Second, I am campaigning all out for Labour in my home constituency. I've always tried to be non-tribal when Tweeting for FTN, just generally anti-Coalition, but will find it harder and harder in the heat of the campaign.

Just DM me, Refitman or Ohsocynical for the sign on if you can help

Hi Paul

At one time I would have but I can no longer be non-tribal & can't always promise to be around if assailed by yet another black dog attack.

I have no hesitation in recommend Tubby however - his tweets are always reasonable (although he would need to enlist some emoticons to convey when he's being sarcastic.....

)

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:44 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Morning All

Just to repeat a plea I made the other day. Would anyone else like to take on my Tweeting duties for a while?

Two reasons really. One is new work patterns that mean I can't hop on and off Twitter so easily.

Second, I am campaigning all out for Labour in my home constituency. I've always tried to be non-tribal when Tweeting for FTN, just generally anti-Coalition, but will find it harder and harder in the heat of the campaign.

Just DM me, Refitman or Ohsocynical for the sign on if you can help

I would, but work forbids, not reliable as a result.

Also, I am not very reasonable and I am at times liable to swear.

Apart from that I am quite nice.

Tish · Post by **Tish** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:48 am

letsskiptotheleft wrote:''The Tory attacks are failing, and they don't seem to know what to do about it''

And breathe! I have been as downbeat as anyone, but this piece makes a few valid points.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/02 ... hange-cour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That article is spot on. The Tories, and the New Labour dinasours like Milburn and Hutton, don't seem to realise that it isn't the 1990s anymore, the debate has moved on. The days when attacking Labour for being "in thrall to the unions" or "anti business" paid dividends are long gone, there's at least two generations of voters now for whom the word union is utterly meaningless, and who view business interests as often in direct conflict with their own, and therefore welcome a party who stands up to them.

And the Tories other traditional big issue, immigration, doesn't work for them either, becouse voters who really care about that will go straight to UKIP instead. The only thing they've got is more and more desperate clampdowns on "welfare" and even that seems to have reached its limits as a vote winner, its hard to believe that there is anyone out there who has resisted voting Tory so far becouse they considered them too soft on benefits, so who is it meant to appeal to?

They've got nothing, basically.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:52 am

: ScreenShot00156.jpg (42.97 KiB) Viewed 11919 times

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:56 am

Tish wrote:
letsskiptotheleft wrote:''The Tory attacks are failing, and they don't seem to know what to do about it''

And breathe! I have been as downbeat as anyone, but this piece makes a few valid points.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/02 ... hange-cour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That article is spot on. The Tories, and the New Labour dinasours like Milburn and Hutton, don't seem to realise that it isn't the 1990s anymore, the debate has moved on. The days when attacking Labour for being "in thrall to the unions" or "anti business" paid dividends are long gone, there's at least two generations of voters now for whom the word union is utterly meaningless, and who view business interests as often in direct conflict with their own, and therefore welcome a party who stands up to them.

And the Tories other traditional big issue, immigration, doesn't work for them either, becouse voters who really care about that will go straight to UKIP instead. The only thing they've got is more and more desperate clampdowns on "welfare" and even that seems to have reached its limits as a vote winner, its hard to believe that there is anyone out there who has resisted voting Tory so far becouse they considered them too soft on benefits, so who is it meant to appeal to?

They've got nothing, basically.

Charles Clarke, the man whose ego told he could have won the last election for Labour is the latest to offer unwanted advice, being a helpful chap, the latest Blariteasaurus chose to relay it via The Times. Win the last election, he couldn't hold onto his own seat. Tosser.

Toby Latimer · Post by **Toby Latimer** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 11:58 am

All that constant barrage of below the belt hate & negativity from Crosby, Cameron, Murdoch, Barclay's, Dacre, Desmond and the rest of the MSM etc - but the Cons still seem stuck. Makes one wonder how much they would be dropping if we had a truly impartial media.

Tish · Post by **Tish** » Tue 03 Feb, 2015 12:01 pm

Here's a sad tale from the Telegraph about how terribly difficult it is owning a million pound house in London when you don't have the income to go with it and therefore "don't feel rich." My heart bled as I read it

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/prop ... naire.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Funnily enough though the comments underneath aren't terribly sympathetic, even Telegraph readers don't really seem to sorry for poor Mr Wallop, especially as he admits he only managed to buy this manacle around his neck becouse: "I was given £210,000 in 1998." Some people just have no heart.