Friday 6th February

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 2:56 am

Good way to start the day

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 3:01 am

And to add context to yet another whine from a businessman

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 5:04 am

pk1 wrote:Good way to start the day

Now that is a good way to start the day

As for the Dunstone business – especially with the iPad turning up chez-Brookes – well, 'tis only deserving of a 'mwahahahaa'...

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 5:28 am

And welcome to Nicky and SallyFran who both joined us yesterday

If you hear odd noises and squeals from the kitchen don't worry. I'm having a little difficulty perfecting my new recipe: battered humous and taramasalata. It's difficult enough getting either of the main ingredients to hold together when I dip them in batter – but, for some unaccountable reason, they sort of explode when I drop them into the deep fat fryer :puzzled:

However, once I get it sussed, I just know that they'll be a welcome addition to the menu.

Post by **refitman** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 7:17 am

Good morning. Labour lead at 1 point on Yougov:

Latest YouGov / The Sun results 5th February -

Con 32%, (-2)
Lab 33%, (nc)
LD 9%, (+3)
UKIP 15%, (+2)
GRN 5%; (-2)

APP -19 (nc)

Post by **refitman** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 7:26 am

Ed Miliband tells Ian Axton "I will pay the mansion tax"

Labour leader Ed Miliband says he will probably have to pay the new mansion tax.
His party wants to introduce it and use the proceeds to pay for more staff in the NHS.
Recent reports suggest that Mr Miliband's London home is worth £2.6 million.
When asked if could afford the mansion text he responded "I'm a relatively well paid person"

http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/upd ... nsion-tax/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 8:22 am

pk1 wrote:Good way to start the day

He's obviously realised that it really helps to have him - Miliband - declaring Labour will stop the badger culls very strongly (as it has been Labour policy for some years now and the shadow Environment ministers have already said so publicly many times) especially when Cameron has admitted it's the most unpopular policy he's introduced - and so brought it to the attention of the media and public again. Thank you Cameron - your arrogance is sometimes a gift.

But yes - great front page. Could do with it on the nationals as well - would help a lot of animal and wildlife lovers to be very clear about this choice.

SallyFran · Post by **SallyFran** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 8:44 am

LadyCentauria wrote:And welcome to Nicky and SallyFran who both joined us yesterday

(cheerily waves right back)

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 8:48 am

Morning all.

The 8am news on Today had the second story as the Kings Fund on the damaging health reforms made by the Coalition.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... kings-fund" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:03 am

LadyCentauria wrote:And welcome to Nicky and SallyFran who both joined us yesterday

If you hear odd noises and squeals from the kitchen don't worry. I'm having a little difficulty perfecting my new recipe: battered humous and taramasalata. It's difficult enough getting either of the main ingredients to hold together when I dip them in batter – but, for some unaccountable reason, they sort of explode when I drop them into the deep fat fryer :puzzled:

However, once I get it sussed, I just know that they'll be a welcome addition to the menu.

Sounds like you just invented pop-houmous

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:07 am

Morning all...and Hi to the new posters...it's filling up nicely in here

Well it seems to have been quite a successful week for Murkydochia (I know it's been mentioned already but as you know - it's a Wolfie-obsession

)

In a statement, the US Department of Justice said it was ending its “investigation into News Corp regarding possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act concerning bribes allegedly paid for news leads”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 19596.html

...money talks, as usual...and then, for me, perhaps the saddest news - much as I hate to say it, it seems Citizen Tommy has also been 'turned'. From a position of trying to clear his name and fight Murkydochia (a certain Mr Coulson was supposed to be facing charges of perjury in January) he seems to have changed his focus - his blog no longer exists and every tweet and public appearance is passionately Nationalist - still uttering socialist words, just not really looking at anything but 'Scotland will be free of the Tories' (and everyone in England is Tory) - so he no longer fights for the common man - just the Scottish common man...alongside Murkydochian favourite and Chief Scottish Obfuscation Enabler Salmond....and what of the perjury trial? Google seems to have been purged with no reference dated after the 21st of November, the date Coulson left prison

I really hope I'm wrong, but something smells a bit.

Mind you - as you know, I live in Hope (just North of Peterborough) and the much trumpeted news from Queensland (no? no reporting at all? I can't believe(TM) that

) that the annointed Murkydochians are losing their grip is most definitely a bright spot...and if 'The Australian' thinks it's an 'illogical' disaster, who are we to argue

...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion ... 7203642053

'It may be a disaster for Australia as well, as the electorate dives for the lowest common (and illogical) denominator but it’s the Prime Minister who faces the next wave of wrath from his colleagues and the electorate.'

A bit like Greece and the whole 'we're not wearing ties, we're not using limousines, we're not having a security barrier to keep the poor, unwashed and downtrodden out of sight, we're not versed in the MSM gobbly-de-gook so we actually answer questions and have the conviction of our ideas'...or maybe Tunisia...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... cess-story

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:15 am

Morning all and welcome SallyFran! Do feel free to get stuck in!

This King's Fund stuff: just listened to the bloke on the wireless. He said H&SCA was a massive diversion of resources in the first half of this Parliament and even reminded those who've forgotten that it was something Empty Dave explicitly promised not to do. So far so good. Then he said that the last thing the NHS needs now is another shake-up. He further said that he thought all the party leaders 'get this'. My question is: if Labour repeals H&SCA, as it has pledged to do, will this imply a further large re-organisation or can it be done by simply making small changes here and there? I honestly don't 'get it'.

SallyFran · Post by **SallyFran** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:21 am

frightful_oik wrote:Morning all and welcome SallyFran! Do feel free to get stuck in!

This King's Fund stuff: just listened to the bloke on the wireless. He said H&SCA was a massive diversion of resources in the first half of this Parliament and even reminded those who've forgotten that it was something Empty Dave explicitly promised not to do. So far so good. Then he said that the last thing the NHS needs now is another shake-up. He further said that he thought all the party leaders 'get this'. My question is: if Labour repeals H&SCA, as it has pledged to do, will this imply a further large re-organisation or can it be done by simply making small changes here and there? I honestly don't 'get it'.

Thanks very much and good morning to you too.

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:22 am

RobertSnozers wrote:UK Polling Report on Sheffield Hallam polling

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9200" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Edited highlights:

In Survation’s poll the basic figures, weighted by likelihood to vote, were CON 22, LAB 33, LD 23, UKIP 9
In Ashcroft’s poll the basic figures, weighted for likelihood to vote, were CON 23, LAB 33, LD 17, UKIP 14

One difference that people commented on yesteday is that Lord Ashcroft uses political weighting in his constituency polls, but Survation do not. This has the potential to make a sizeable difference in the results, but I don’t think it is the case here – looking at the recalled vote in Survation’s poll it looks fairly close to what actually happened, weighting by past vote would probably have bumped up the Lib Dems a little, but the reason the Lib Dems are so far behind is not because of the weighting, it’s because more than half of the people who voted Lib Dem in 2010 aren’t currently planning on doing so again.

Both had a chunky Labour lead, in fact, Ashcroft’s was slightly bigger than Survation’s. Ashcroft however did two things that Survation did not do. He asked a two stage question, asking people their general voting intention and then their constituency question, and he reallocated don’t knows.

In this particular case the reallocation of don’t knows changed Ashcroft’s final figures to CON 19, LAB 28, LD 31, UKIP 11, pushing the Lib Dems up into a narrow first place. Technically I think there was an error in Ashcroft’s table – they seem to have reallocated all don’t knows, rather than the proportion they normally do. Done correctly the Lib Dems and Labour would probably have been closer together, or Labour a smidgin ahead, but the fact remains that Ashcroft’s method produces a tight race, Survation’s a healthy looking Labour lead.
So the upshot is, both recent polls should have had Labour ahead, even when constituency factors are included and don't knows reallocated (properly). Whatever, it shows that Clegg is very far from safe. Expect the magic 'Labour can't win here' graph. In fact, we've already seen it haven't we?

And is it just me or is this not the first time we've seen an error in the data crunching for Ashcroft's polling that makes things look worse for Labour?

Had to do more than 'thank' for that

...and re Ashcroft (and all the polling really) - it's all about asking questions that elicit the correct answers (IMHO), so that they (the Condemnation corporate lickspittles) can continue to convince themselves that they are right...and better than everyone else....and know everything...and should never be questioned...and leave them alone, they're trying to count the profit from the upcoming corporate contracts

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:24 am

We need RobertSnozers to explain properly but my understanding is that Labour are going to remove the elements of the Act that promote competition and require all services to be put out to tender. They are not planning to turn CCGs back into PCTs, as this would be more reorganizing although I believe CCGs have been combining to the point they are going to resemble the old PCTs soon anyway. Hope that helps and look forward to seeing some more detail from those who have greater knowledge than me.

Edited to add that was supposed to be a reply to frightful_oil. I,m off shopping now but will be back later to see how the MSM make unequivocal condemnation of Lansley's health act "bad for Ed".

Lonewolfie · Post by **Lonewolfie** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:32 am

...well well well....as if by magic...

'Practically, politically and morally, however, Abbott's authority has already been shredded.

Australians cannot have confidence in a prime minister whose own members have withdrawn it. It is now a matter of time.'

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/ ... 37ygj.html

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:37 am

Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.

Maeght · Post by **Maeght** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:43 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.

Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:45 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Morning all and welcome SallyFran! Do feel free to get stuck in!

This King's Fund stuff: just listened to the bloke on the wireless. He said H&SCA was a massive diversion of resources in the first half of this Parliament and even reminded those who've forgotten that it was something Empty Dave explicitly promised not to do. So far so good. Then he said that the last thing the NHS needs now is another shake-up. He further said that he thought all the party leaders 'get this'. My question is: if Labour repeals H&SCA, as it has pledged to do, will this imply a further large re-organisation or can it be done by simply making small changes here and there? I honestly don't 'get it'.
This is the hundred billion pound question. I think everyone now accepts that you can't transform outcomes by changing the architecture of the NHS, and I believe that Labour's plans involve working with the organisations that are there in more or less the shape they are (I mean this in terms of commissioning and 'strategic' bodies, not the front line ones). It's worth noting that when Labour made changes before, even big ones, it did so in a much more evolutionary way than the coalition have done. The NHS Plan took until 2001 in their second parliament to finalise and put in place.

The other thing to remember is that the H&SC Act was about much more than the structure. The structural bit was the diversion. Any Willing Provider is about ethos, not organisations, and the legislation that makes commissioners go out to tender on just about everything can be scrapped without changing the architecture. Labour could introduce new legislation that kept the organisations (which, to be honest have rapidly morphed back into something not that different from what we had in 2010) but still made radical changes to the way those organisations worked.

The fly in the ointment is integration of social care. I don't see how you can do that properly without creating new organisations, although you could potentially move over social care staff to existing bodies like community trusts and mental health trusts.

Edit: @Willow, crossed with you! Thanks, and Snap

Morning Robert

My understanding was that Burnham was planning to make use of mechanisms that Lansley put in place to transfer NHS funds to local authorities.

An unkind (but probably accurate) reading of this was that the Tories did this so they could say they were not reducing NHS funding, while slashing council funding and making up some of the shortfall from the NHS.

Nevertheless, this mechanism is in place to link NHS funds to care in the community. If the local authorities are properly resourced and trained to deal with this, it could be very powerful it seems to me. They ought to be able to take an overview of patients' / clients' needs and direct resources appropriately for best outcomes and best value.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:47 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.

I'm off then

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:49 am

Maeght wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.
Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.

You correctly identified them as biscuits, not cakes, so I'm cool with that. Off to restock later.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 9:54 am

RobertSnozers wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Morning all and welcome SallyFran! Do feel free to get stuck in!

This King's Fund stuff: just listened to the bloke on the wireless. He said H&SCA was a massive diversion of resources in the first half of this Parliament and even reminded those who've forgotten that it was something Empty Dave explicitly promised not to do. So far so good. Then he said that the last thing the NHS needs now is another shake-up. He further said that he thought all the party leaders 'get this'. My question is: if Labour repeals H&SCA, as it has pledged to do, will this imply a further large re-organisation or can it be done by simply making small changes here and there? I honestly don't 'get it'.
This is the hundred billion pound question. I think everyone now accepts that you can't transform outcomes by changing the architecture of the NHS, and I believe that Labour's plans involve working with the organisations that are there in more or less the shape they are (I mean this in terms of commissioning and 'strategic' bodies, not the front line ones). It's worth noting that when Labour made changes before, even big ones, it did so in a much more evolutionary way than the coalition have done. The NHS Plan took until 2001 in their second parliament to finalise and put in place.

The other thing to remember is that the H&SC Act was about much more than the structure. The structural bit was the diversion. Any Willing Provider is about ethos, not organisations, and the legislation that makes commissioners go out to tender on just about everything can be scrapped without changing the architecture. Labour could introduce new legislation that kept the organisations (which, to be honest have rapidly morphed back into something not that different from what we had in 2010) but still made radical changes to the way those organisations worked.

The fly in the ointment is integration of social care. I don't see how you can do that properly without creating new organisations, although you could potentially move over social care staff to existing bodies like community trusts and mental health trusts.

Edit: @Willow, crossed with you! Thanks, and Snap

Thanks Robert. I had you in mind when I asked the question. So, Andy Burnham won't so much repeal the Act, rather selectively pull its teeth then do you think?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:09 am

frightful_oik wrote:Morning all and welcome SallyFran! Do feel free to get stuck in!

This King's Fund stuff: just listened to the bloke on the wireless. He said H&SCA was a massive diversion of resources in the first half of this Parliament and even reminded those who've forgotten that it was something Empty Dave explicitly promised not to do. So far so good. Then he said that the last thing the NHS needs now is another shake-up. He further said that he thought all the party leaders 'get this'. My question is: if Labour repeals H&SCA, as it has pledged to do, will this imply a further large re-organisation or can it be done by simply making small changes here and there? I honestly don't 'get it'.

If Labour repeal the Act (which they will) they will have to consider how the "reforms" will be reversed. If they don't bring in new legislation to sort it out (which would cost money), they'll have to whittle away at it over time. Keeping the NHS out of TTIP will help.

The first thing is that the wasteful spending on the tendering processes would stop; as it is now, a lot of money is being squandered on this, and the Act allows for companies that fail to win a contract challenging the winner in the courts - if the winner is the NHS it takes money out of services if they end up in protracted legal shenanigans.
The next thing is to remember that Labour will give the NHS preferred bidder status by default; that means it will become less likely private companies will bid if they know the likelihood is that they won't get the contract. As time goes on, work will be given to the NHS and eventually there will be fewer private companies bothering to bid.

The H&SC Act abolished SHAs and PCTs, and at the moment there is no effective public health organisation in NHS England on a local level. PCTs used to have public health teams which ran the emergency commands for things like floods (to prevent water-borne disease), did a lot of health education and preventive work, and had shared responsibility with the Home Office for DAATs (drug/alcohol services). Most of that has gone, and the CCGs aren't providing replacement services in many areas. Things like needle exchanges get very little funding now and are run by charities; a lot of "healthy living" initiatives are gone too.
Labour in government would have to think about how it would address this, and I suspect it would involve some spending.

The headlines in the media are invariably about acute trusts and their performance; what a lot of people don't know about is all the work that used to go on behind the drama. PCTs co-ordinated primary care, but that had a knock-on effect on acute services, because if the PCT got it right there was good GP/community cover which stopped the acute services having to pick up care as they do now.
A large cohort of staff working in public health and preventative work got made redundant when the PCTs were abolished - but there were a lot of managers and commissioners who were re-hired by CCGs (and the likes of McKinsey and PWC) to run commissioning.
That cost billions in redundancy packages, all cash that can never be replaced.

I'm inclined to think that a Labour government would have to wait while the private companies gradually move on; if they restore the PCTs in England, it would cost money - but if Burnham wants better-integrated health/social care, he'll have to do something like restore a PCT-type level of management at some point.

NHS England is a mess. I've posted here many times about how the waiting lists are being fiddled with, how the qualifying criteria for some elective procedures have been altered to the point that people have to be in real trouble before they even get close to a waiting list - and still the waits increase. Preventive care has all but gone in some places.
The Social Attitudes Survey has patient satisfaction with the NHS in England at 65%. In Wales, it's 92%.

A Labour government will, yet again, be forced to repair the chaos the Tories leave behind. It's happened before, and it will cost money.
I'm confident they will do it - but it will take time.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:10 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Maeght wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.
Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.
You correctly identified them as biscuits, not cakes, so I'm cool with that. Off to restock later.

They are cakes ! They go hard if left out whereas biscuits go soft.

Tonibel · Post by **Tonibel** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:11 am

Just catching up with last nights posts and the discussion between RR2 and Ernst about local government. I can endorse everything RR2 says about West Wales local government. We moved here (Carmarthenshire) 40 years ago. Our "independent" councillor was then in post and had been for some years (and his father before him). In those 40 years he has mostly been returned unopposed and, while I have always voted for anyone who stood against him most of my neighbours unthinkingly supported him. He finally retired (aged 90) on health grounds last year, and people were surprised that his daughter didn't take over from him!
On one occasion I asked him where he stood politically. His reply was that "We don't believe in bringing politics into local government"

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:12 am

Maeght wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.
Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.

I've still got some chocolate cake. Have a bit of that.

If we're really good, OhSo might do some baking. Her scones are to die for....

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:16 am

Peter Smith ‏@Redpeter99 13 mins13 minutes ago
Redcar Lib Dem MP Swales does a Harry Redknapp. Decides to stand down rather than getting ignominiously booted out.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general ... edcar.html

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:18 am

ephemerid wrote:
Maeght wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.
Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.

I've still got some chocolate cake. Have a bit of that.

If we're really good, OhSo might do some baking. Her scones are to die for....

My ex-wife made scones like that, luckily I realised before I took a bite.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:25 am

pk1 wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Maeght wrote: Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.
You correctly identified them as biscuits, not cakes, so I'm cool with that. Off to restock later.
They are cakes ! They go hard if left out whereas biscuits go soft.

Cakes for VAT purposes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaffa_Cake ... it_for_VAT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't like them myself...

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:29 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:
pk1 wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote: You correctly identified them as biscuits, not cakes, so I'm cool with that. Off to restock later.
They are cakes ! They go hard if left out whereas biscuits go soft.
Cakes for VAT purposes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaffa_Cake ... it_for_VAT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't like them myself...

Don't like jaffa cakes? How is that possible

Like many other foodstuffs discussed here, Aldi's are the gold standard.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:32 am

StephenDolan wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
pk1 wrote: They are cakes ! They go hard if left out whereas biscuits go soft.
Cakes for VAT purposes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaffa_Cake ... it_for_VAT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't like them myself...
Don't like jaffa cakes? How is that possible Like many other foodstuffs discussed here, Aldi's are the gold standard.

I don't like jaffa cakes, they make my teeth curl - do we have a marmite situation developing?

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:35 am

StephenDolan wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
pk1 wrote: They are cakes ! They go hard if left out whereas biscuits go soft.
Cakes for VAT purposes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaffa_Cake ... it_for_VAT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't like them myself...
Don't like jaffa cakes? How is that possible Like many other foodstuffs discussed here, Aldi's are the gold standard.

Rather partial to an Aldi jaffa cake myself. That shop never ceases to surprise me, I had a more than passable haggis from them earlier this week.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:35 am

Lonewolfie wrote:
...money talks, as usual...and then, for me, perhaps the saddest news - much as I hate to say it, it seems Citizen Tommy has also been 'turned'. From a position of trying to clear his name and fight Murkydochia (a certain Mr Coulson was supposed to be facing charges of perjury in January) he seems to have changed his focus - his blog no longer exists and every tweet and public appearance is passionately Nationalist - still uttering socialist words, just not really looking at anything but 'Scotland will be free of the Tories' (and everyone in England is Tory) - so he no longer fights for the common man - just the Scottish common man...alongside Murkydochian favourite and Chief Scottish Obfuscation Enabler Salmond....and what of the perjury trial? Google seems to have been purged with no reference dated after the 21st of November, the date Coulson left prison I really hope I'm wrong, but something smells a bit.

I posted this from James Doleman on Monday:

@jamesdoleman: Andy Coulson pre-trial hearing in Edinburgh adjourns until next Monday.

so all is not over for young Mr C

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:37 am

AngryAsWell wrote:do we have a marmite situation developing?

Noooo, not marmite. Can't stand even the smell !

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:38 am

Miliband leads Cameron in PM stakes
New poll model gives Labour leader 67% chance of making No 10

Its in FT so I can't see any more...
http://www.ft.com/home/uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:44 am

LabourList media round up:

DISABLED people are told to call a premium rate government advice line more than a year after a No10 order to end them. The Disability Living Allowance Helpline, overseen by the Department for Work and Pensions, still has an 0845 number at up to 41p a minute. And last year it took 3.6million calls, making its private company operators a fortune. Veteran Labour MP Frank Field helped The Sun expose the Rip-Off Britain scandal of premium rate numbers being forced on the needy. - The Sun (£)

Can't quote from the article but Frank Field & the Scum giving a hoot about the 'needy' must surely win today's oxymoron prize.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 10:48 am

TheGrimSqueaker wrote: ... I had a more than passable haggis from them earlier this week.

High fibre recipe?

Ok, I'll get my coat.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:02 am

Poor old Hugo...his latest didn't last very long this morning.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:02 am

ephemerid wrote:
Maeght wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Morning all.

And welcome to SallyFran. As ever, help yourself to biscuits; however there are no Jaffa Cakes, as Maeght ate them all earlier in the week & I haven't had a chance to restock yet.
Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.

I've still got some chocolate cake. Have a bit of that.

If we're really good, OhSo might do some baking. Her scones are to die for....

Sorry, but it's too cold in the kitchen to do more than make a quick cup of tea.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:07 am

Hello there to our newbies in the last few days

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:09 am

AngryAsWell wrote:Miliband leads Cameron in PM stakes
New poll model gives Labour leader 67% chance of making No 10

Its in FT so I can't see any more...
http://www.ft.com/home/uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isn't it a tease. Another line reads "Cameron has mummy problems polls suggest".

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:11 am

I'll have a look at the FT when I get to work and post about it on here.

Thanks for the additional info Ephie and Robert.

Maeght · Post by **Maeght** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:15 am

pk1 wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
Maeght wrote: Sorry about that but you must know that it is impossible to just eat one.
You correctly identified them as biscuits, not cakes, so I'm cool with that. Off to restock later.
They are cakes ! They go hard if left out whereas biscuits go soft.

Your logic is impeccable but I will persist in thinking of them as and calling them biscuits.

Maeght · Post by **Maeght** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:16 am

Alternative post to Jaffa Cakes ( definitely biscuits ) disagreement:

Greek Crisis. Sorry cannot find proper place to reply.

I said I would repost if I understood anything from the Schäuble - Varoufakis press conference.

There wasn’t much to report as nobody blinked. But I did note 2 things:

Schäuble was his usual patronising self, playing his ‘ I am right, everybody else is wrong ‘ part. He taunted Varoufakis, suggesting Germany send 500 tax inspectors to Greece to help them get in some tax. This was an insult, and received as such. But it is the crux of the matter. Greece will need help from everywhere to get tax in from the Greek Oligarchs, masters of making money vanish across borders ( in my head I call them possible founders of ISO : international slippy oligarchs )
Chancellor Merkel was away in the Ukraine. Yes, it was very, very important but believe me, she will use that if necessary.

I thought Varoufakis did well and especially when he wouldn’t let Schäuble have the last word over ‘agree to disagree’.

So it’s back to wait and see and crossing fingers.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:24 am

pk1 wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:do we have a marmite situation developing?
Noooo, not marmite. Can't stand even the smell !

I love it. And my daughter puts it on buttered crumpets

Nicky · Post by **Nicky** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:34 am

Good article by Paul Routledge regarding Ed and the fat cats.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed ... ng-5113283" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It was mentioned here a few days ago how John Mills, who's both a Labour supporter and a very successful businessman, was misquoted by the Mail on Sunday as criticising Ed and Labour. Mills took to Twitter to set the record straight and also ask various MSM journos to contact him (they didn't - quelle surprise).

What these businessmen who've been slating Labour seem to fail to notice is that businesses need CUSTOMERS. If people are feeling the pinch and feel insecure financially, they're much less inclined to be buying goods and services.

Another thing about John Mills - I remember hearing him speak as a guest on Any Questions (think it was summer of 2012). Martha Kearney was covering for J Dimbleby. You won't be surprised that she butted in when Mills started to be critical of the government's performance. He hasn't been invited back as far as I know.

Nicky · Post by **Nicky** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:37 am

ohsocynical wrote:
pk1 wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:do we have a marmite situation developing?
Noooo, not marmite. Can't stand even the smell !

I love it. And my daughter puts it on buttered crumpets

My youngest is obsessed with marmite.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:51 am

frightful_oik wrote:Morning all and welcome SallyFran! Do feel free to get stuck in!

This King's Fund stuff: just listened to the bloke on the wireless. He said H&SCA was a massive diversion of resources in the first half of this Parliament and even reminded those who've forgotten that it was something Empty Dave explicitly promised not to do. So far so good. Then he said that the last thing the NHS needs now is another shake-up. He further said that he thought all the party leaders 'get this'. My question is: if Labour repeals H&SCA, as it has pledged to do, will this imply a further large re-organisation or can it be done by simply making small changes here and there? I honestly don't 'get it'.

I thought it was the 2013 regulations they were going to repeal, not the whole thing?
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013 ... tents/made" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:52 am

SallyFran wrote:
LadyCentauria wrote:And welcome to Nicky and SallyFran who both joined us yesterday
(cheerily waves right back)

Good-afternoon, SallyFran, welcome!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 06 Feb, 2015 11:57 am

Nicky wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
pk1 wrote: Noooo, not marmite. Can't stand even the smell !

I love it. And my daughter puts it on buttered crumpets
My youngest is obsessed with marmite.

The fondant confection known as the Cadbury Creme Egg clearly separates the world into two kinds of people: Those who love them & those who don't. And both kinds of people are good.

Same with marmite.