Monday 16th March 2015

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:24 pm

ErnstRemarx wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Some thoughts on "tribalism".

In the entirety of the MSM, and very much including the Guardian the Labour Party is subjected to a constant barrage of attacks. Twitter is much the same, I have watched one person (who very much fits the Narxist description) hurl a constant stream of spittle flecked invective at Labours MPs, any poster who has dared to pick him up on it and a number of people he has identified as "traitors" pretty much nonstop for 48 hours; we're subjected to attacks by cybernats, from people who claim to be Green Party supporters (although not all are genuine), by the likes of Julie Bailey & her coterie and by run of the mill Tories.

FTN is the one place I thought I could express my views openly, without being subjected to attack, but it seems if I then I am being partisan. So if not here, where can I speak openly?
Grimmers - speak your mind. If people don't like it, they can challenge it, but this isn't Twitter. We all know the rules.

But it seems me doing that, speaking my mind, may have been offputting for people like utopiandreams, a poster who I always respected at the Other Place and whose voice was always welcome. I could care less about accusations of partisanship from some of our recent departees, as far as I'm concerned they were only ever here to provoke trouble anyway, but it is worrying when I hear it from so other people.

And can I join the others in welcoming you utopiandreams. Jaffa cakes are in the kitchen, plenty there now I am no longer allowed to eat them.

TheGrimSqueaker · Post by **TheGrimSqueaker** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:26 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
yahyah wrote:
pk1 wrote:Ashcroft National Poll:

CON 31 (-3)
LAB 29 (-1)
LIB 8 (+3)
UKIP 15 (=)
GRN 8 (=)

I just don't believe that Labour's vote is no better than 2010.
Ashcroft poll, thus those figures are just those "absolutely certain to vote" - said questions almost invariably imply a turnout of barely 50% (even less than 2001)

Virtually everybody agrees its going to be a lot more than that in May (probably higher than 2010's 65%)

Will be very surprising if the good Lord's "unadjusted" result doesn't have Labour at least level. Its been the case the last two weeks.

The unweighted figures put Labour on 32%, the Tories on 30%.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:28 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Some thoughts on "tribalism".

In the entirety of the MSM, and very much including the Guardian the Labour Party is subjected to a constant barrage of attacks. Twitter is much the same, I have watched one person (who very much fits the Narxist description) hurl a constant stream of spittle flecked invective at Labours MPs, any poster who has dared to pick him up on it and a number of people he has identified as "traitors" pretty much nonstop for 48 hours; we're subjected to attacks by cybernats, from people who claim to be Green Party supporters (although not all are genuine), by the likes of Julie Bailey & her coterie and by run of the mill Tories.

FTN is the one place I thought I could express my views openly, without being subjected to attack, but it seems if I then I am being partisan. So if not here, where can I speak openly?

I'm having a hard job to get my head around it too.

This is a left leaning board. We might have arrived here from different directions, but it's where our political beliefs and wants have hardened into support for the Labour party.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:32 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:Hi Utopiandreams, good to see you.

Hmm, tribalism. Are we there again?

I suspect we'll never be free of this until we have a voting system where every vote counts, and even then, who gets the most seats will still dictate which party leads the government so there will be tension between people who want to vote for a small party and people who want to make sure that the 'right' big party gets to lead things.

In any event, I actually don't see a lot of genuine tribalism here, and what I do see isn't generally from the Labour supporters. What I see as tribalism is the blind support of a particular party, whatever they do, and an inability to see anyone else as anything but the enemy. What I actually see here is a pretty broad coalition of traditional Labour supporters, former LibDem/floating voters and people who weren't that interested in politics before 2010 who are united by being desperate to get rid of the ConDems and see Labour as the best chance of doing that. And they can defend that position pretty strongly. There is plenty of criticism of Labour here, and discussion over things that people dislike about the party from those who nevertheless support it.

I think some people on the left have such a strong dislike of some aspects of Labour, whether its Iraq, excessive timidity over social security, some of the more authoritarian inclinations of New Labour or whatever, that they feel anyone supporting the party despite those things must be being 'tribal' - as opposed to simply making a different set of choices to the ones they have made.

I didn't mean to open old wounds with my 'trbal' comment. So what I shall say is that I'm firmly in the camp of getting the Tories out. As I said I'm an ex-LibDemmer but so far believe that Miliband does offer something different.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:37 pm

What bugs me is that the 45%ers are being played.

Salmond told Rhodri Morgan years ago that he was going to target Labour voters.
I think he'd have targeted whoever was necessary to achieve his ego trip.

Can't find the original quote from Rhodri but he wrote this after the failed Indy referendum:

''Alex Salmond explained his strategy to me before I left office in 2009. He said that it would all depend on the 2010 General Election. He expected a Tory Government to be elected but with few if any MPs in Scotland.

He could then cash in on that in the 2011 Scottish Parliament Elections and go for independence after that. The plan depended on persuading traditional Labour voters on Clydeside to back him in getting out of the UK, so intense was their dislike of the Tories.''

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/news- ... ce-7799700" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:37 pm

utopiandreams wrote: I'm firmly in the camp of getting the Tories out.

That's the very thing that binds us.

Some of us have been left a little sore after the last round of accusation of 'tribalism' but tolerance from all of us will go a long way to healing the wounds.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:38 pm

utopiandreams wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:Hi Utopiandreams, good to see you.

Hmm, tribalism. Are we there again?

I suspect we'll never be free of this until we have a voting system where every vote counts, and even then, who gets the most seats will still dictate which party leads the government so there will be tension between people who want to vote for a small party and people who want to make sure that the 'right' big party gets to lead things.

In any event, I actually don't see a lot of genuine tribalism here, and what I do see isn't generally from the Labour supporters. What I see as tribalism is the blind support of a particular party, whatever they do, and an inability to see anyone else as anything but the enemy. What I actually see here is a pretty broad coalition of traditional Labour supporters, former LibDem/floating voters and people who weren't that interested in politics before 2010 who are united by being desperate to get rid of the ConDems and see Labour as the best chance of doing that. And they can defend that position pretty strongly. There is plenty of criticism of Labour here, and discussion over things that people dislike about the party from those who nevertheless support it.

I think some people on the left have such a strong dislike of some aspects of Labour, whether its Iraq, excessive timidity over social security, some of the more authoritarian inclinations of New Labour or whatever, that they feel anyone supporting the party despite those things must be being 'tribal' - as opposed to simply making a different set of choices to the ones they have made.
I didn't mean to open old wounds with my 'trbal' comment. So what I shall say is that I'm firmly in the camp of getting the Tories out. As I said I'm an ex-LibDemmer but so far believe that Miliband does offer something different.

I'm also an ex LibDemer....

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:41 pm

yahyah wrote:I agree Grim.

I used to be naive and thought that SNP, Plaid, Greens & Lib Dems were fellow travellers - until I got online and saw the often sweary barrage of tripe that gets thrown at anyone daring to think helping a Labour government to power is a good idea.
So my heart hardened to them, especially when we got posts on here swearing at Ed M because he wears a suit.

My tribalism has emerged in the last five years.
Remembering that I stuck a Vote Liberal Democrat poster in my window is what keeps me motivated not to veer to another small 'new, honest, different' tribe.

Totally agree with you and grimmy.
Too much of the calling labour supporters 'tribalists' from people on their own tribalist high horse,what,do they think we vote labour because our dads ,,wearing string vests and reading the mirror did?
That particular poster who had a strop over Eds suit now appears to be quite a staunch Miliband supporter over at the guardian now it's basically a choice of Ed or Dave as the nex pm.
Ignore the lot of them.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:41 pm

TheGrimSqueaker wrote:
ErnstRemarx wrote:
TheGrimSqueaker wrote:Some thoughts on "tribalism".

In the entirety of the MSM, and very much including the Guardian the Labour Party is subjected to a constant barrage of attacks. Twitter is much the same, I have watched one person (who very much fits the Narxist description) hurl a constant stream of spittle flecked invective at Labours MPs, any poster who has dared to pick him up on it and a number of people he has identified as "traitors" pretty much nonstop for 48 hours; we're subjected to attacks by cybernats, from people who claim to be Green Party supporters (although not all are genuine), by the likes of Julie Bailey & her coterie and by run of the mill Tories.

FTN is the one place I thought I could express my views openly, without being subjected to attack, but it seems if I then I am being partisan. So if not here, where can I speak openly?
Grimmers - speak your mind. If people don't like it, they can challenge it, but this isn't Twitter. We all know the rules.
But it seems me doing that, speaking my mind, may have been offputting for people like utopiandreams, a poster who I always respected at the Other Place and whose voice was always welcome. I could care less about accusations of partisanship from some of our recent departees, as far as I'm concerned they were only ever here to provoke trouble anyway, but it is worrying when I hear it from so other people.

And can I join the others in welcoming you utopiandreams. Jaffa cakes are in the kitchen, plenty there now I am no longer allowed to eat them.

Thanks for the Jaffa cakes, TheGrimSqueaker, but I don't really have a sweet tooth. I do get the munchies from time to time, however, so thanks anyway.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:42 pm

Hi Utopian Dreams. I'm not Labour so you're not alone. Just so long as you NEVER suggest you loathe Tories more than I do.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:47 pm

frightful_oik wrote:Hi Utopian Dreams. I'm not Labour so you're not alone. Just so long as you NEVER suggest you loathe Tories more than I do.

I'm glad you are here.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:50 pm

Or share my saucerful of cherry tomatoes topped with Branston pickle.

55DegreesNorth · Post by **55DegreesNorth** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 5:59 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Blackbird. Garden's full of them, mostly scrapping at the moment and couldn't vote for 'red' anything other than socialism in tooth and claw.

Still chuffed at not having a TV licence any longer!
Even though I put food out every day, I haven't seen a single blackbird in the last year. Ditto sparrows. A few blue tits down from dozens a couple of years ago and the same with various types of finch. One wagtail and an occasional robin. Haven't seen a thrush in years.
Wood pigeons and magpies mostly now.

Come to Newcastle. Just this week I've had blackbirds, thrushes, robins, a wren, a goldcrest chaffinches, goldfinches, blue, coal and long tailed tits. The big draw (apart from the feed stations), is a bird bath. Presumably standing water is in short supply round here.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:00 pm

@ utopiandreams

Hello, there!

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:01 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
utopiandreams wrote:

Thanks for the Jaffa cakes, TheGrimSqueaker, but I don't really have a sweet tooth. I do get the munchies from time to time, however, so thanks anyway.
Pringles?

As long as it's not sandwiches . . .

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:03 pm

Is it too early to start an election playlist over in the Pub ?

My suggestions:

When Labour win:
Glad All Over - Dave Clark 5
I'm So Glad - Cream
I See the Light - Simon Dupree
I Feel Fine - Beatles
This is the Day -Captain Beefheart
The Right Track - Billy Butler
Good Vibrations -Beach Boys

If the Tories win:
Not a Second Time: Beatles
I'm Crying - Animals
We've Gotta Get Out of this Place - Animals
Tears of Rage- The Band
Rescue Me - Fontella Bass
Cry Like a Baby - Box Tops
Bad Moon Rising - Creedence
Ain't That a Shame - Fats Domino
What Am I Going To Do -The Dovers

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:06 pm

yahyah wrote:Is it too early to start an election playlist over in the Pub ?

My suggestions:

When Labour win:
Glad All Over - Dave Clark 5
I'm So Glad - Cream
I See the Light - Simon Dupree
I Feel Fine - Beatles
This is the Day -Captain Beefheart
The Right Track - Billy Butler
Good Vibrations -Beach Boys

If the Tories win:
Not a Second Time: Beatles
I'm Crying - Animals
We've Gotta Get Out of this Place - Animals
Tears of Rage- The Band
Rescue Me - Fontella Bass
Cry Like a Baby - Box Tops
Bad Moon Rising - Creedence
Ain't That a Shame - Fats Domino
What Am I Going To Do -The Dovers

You forgot Congratulations by Cliff Richard.....

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:07 pm

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 40 secs41 seconds ago

Electoral Calculus has LAB 55 seats ahead of CON with LAB on 39% chance of majority

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:10 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:No gravy Yahyah?

No point if there's no ice cream.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:14 pm

yahyah wrote:Or share my saucerful of cherry tomatoes topped with Branston pickle.

Sorry yahyah, I nearly reported instead of quoting you. Anyway I'm a fussy bugger so leave the Branston. Have you black pepper?

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:16 pm

yahyah wrote:Is it too early to start an election playlist over in the Pub ?

My suggestions:

When Labour win:
Glad All Over - Dave Clark 5
I'm So Glad - Cream
I See the Light - Simon Dupree
I Feel Fine - Beatles
This is the Day -Captain Beefheart
The Right Track - Billy Butler
Good Vibrations -Beach Boys

If the Tories win:
Not a Second Time: Beatles
I'm Crying - Animals
We've Gotta Get Out of this Place - Animals
Tears of Rage- The Band
Rescue Me - Fontella Bass
Cry Like a Baby - Box Tops
Bad Moon Rising - Creedence
Ain't That a Shame - Fats Domino
What Am I Going To Do -The Dovers

In 2010 all I could think of was Bowie's '5 years',hoping that doesn't happen again.
Edited to add,Lou Reads Perfect Day WHEN Labour wins.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:21 pm

utopiandreams wrote:
yahyah wrote:Or share my saucerful of cherry tomatoes topped with Branston pickle.
Sorry yahyah, I nearly reported instead of quoting you. Anyway I'm a fussy bugger so leave the Branston. Have you black pepper?

I hate Branston pickle.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:24 pm

Since nobody has mentioned it, the latest ICM has the LibDems on just 8% - their lowest with that polling company since Thatcher was PM.

(it also, rather suspiciously, still has the Tories on 36% - a point ahead of Labour - but meh

)

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:25 pm

I love Rowson's cartoons...

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

So much detail to take in.

This week Cleggy's hand is sticking out from the leg of Dave's pantaloons.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:31 pm

oxford dictionary wrote: tribal - chiefly derogatory Characterized by or reflecting strong group loyalty:
eg:"people don’t want political parties stuck in rigid tribal boundaries"

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... ish/tribal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I looked up "social skills" too, but "no match found".

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:36 pm

In education it seems tribal is good.

http://www.tribalgroup.com/ourwork/Page ... emies.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:38 pm

ITV Meridian news just broadcast Julie Etchingham inviting viewers to email a question for the Leaders Debates & get the chance to be invited to the event.

The address for your questions is: debate@itv.com

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:41 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Since nobody has mentioned it, the latest ICM has the LibDems on just 8% - their lowest with that polling company since Thatcher was PM.

(it also, rather suspiciously, still has the Tories on 36% - a point ahead of Labour - but meh )

Since ICM has a methodology that reallocates don't knows based on their 2010 vote, typically Lab -3, Con +2, UKIP -3, LD+4 I don't think they found many Lib Dems.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:44 pm

The Guardian isn't letting go of the Shapps story,they have a piece ,with photographs of Shapps' solicitors threatening letter to Dean Archer.
Very unpleasant stuff.
I believe Archer should report the lawyer to the Law Society.and go after Shapps,of course.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:52 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 40 secs41 seconds ago

Electoral Calculus has LAB 55 seats ahead of CON with LAB on 39% chance of majority

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Whereas:

Election Forecast UK ‏@Election4castUK 17 mins17 minutes ago

Latest forecast update: Con 286, Lab 274, SNP 42, LD 25, DUP 8...

http://electionforecast.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 6:54 pm

Rebecca wrote:The Guardian isn't letting go of the Shapps story,they have a piece ,with photographs of Shapps' solicitors threatening letter to Dean Archer.
Very unpleasant stuff.
I believe Archer should report the lawyer to the Law Society.and do after Shapps,of course.

He certainly shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:00 pm

...blackbirds, thrushes, robins, a wren, a goldcrest chaffinches, goldfinches, blue, coal and long tailed tits...

The trouble with you lot is that you are all Corvidist.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:06 pm

Swarthlander wrote:

...blackbirds, thrushes, robins, a wren, a goldcrest chaffinches, goldfinches, blue, coal and long tailed tits...
The trouble with you lot is that you are all Corvidist.

tribalist, corvidist. bloody cheek.
we'll have a nat on next calling us imperialist.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:08 pm

Goodnight, everyone.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:09 pm

PorFavor wrote:
utopiandreams wrote:
yahyah wrote:Or share my saucerful of cherry tomatoes topped with Branston pickle.
Sorry yahyah, I nearly reported instead of quoting you. Anyway I'm a fussy bugger so leave the Branston. Have you black pepper?
I hate Branston pickle.

Phillipine!
Anyroadup, after my beloved Rams win, (which is most of the time

), they play the excellent James Brown's 'I Feel Good'. It would seem to be apposite should, or should I say when, the occasion arise(s).

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:10 pm

Mind you. I think I probably am a corvidist.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:11 pm

Oh no! There's a Bing Bot browsing the forum. Well it made me smirk.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:12 pm

Do I detect a note of Bingbotism?

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:14 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
Rebecca wrote:The Guardian isn't letting go of the Shapps story,they have a piece ,with photographs of Shapps' solicitors threatening letter to Dean Archer.
Very unpleasant stuff.
I believe Archer should report the lawyer to the Law Society.and do after Shapps,of course.
He certainly shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

IMO,if Dean Archer is interviewed on TV,Shapps is toast.
Shapps' lawyers demanded compensation and legal costs,the poor guy was scared he would lose his house.Shapps was really abusing his position as mp,ESPECIALLY as Mr Archer wasn't the one lying.
This was certainly not a small mistake.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:19 pm

Ummm. If a MP having a second job isn't against the rules and it was known he was operating under multiple business names but no particular outcry, why did Shapps set a lawyer on one of his constituents to shut him up?

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:20 pm

Hmmm, Crick on C4 news saying that Labour & Unite have clashed over selecting Karie Murphy to challenge the Halifax seat.

Apparently a sub-committee of the NEC met this afternoon & excluded Murphy from the shortlist. This angered Unite who has described the decision as 'disgraceful' & are apparently particularly angry about the role played by Harriet Harman. HH is a member of the panel that met today, is herself a Unite member & is the wife of Jack Dromey, another Unite member.
Unite claim that she must have been inveigled into blocking Murphy.

Directing some of their ire towards EM, Unite were told that it was purely a matter for the NEC, nothing to do with EM's office.

Meanwhile, the outgoing Lab MP, Linda Riorden, has made 2 official complaints to the party, claiming underhand & undemocratic manipulation by senior officials.

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:22 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:Mind you. I think I probably am a corvidist.

Oh yeh! And just who is going to clean up all the road kill then?
No other bird will do it, it's beneath them, they won't do such 'lowly' jobs.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:22 pm

Rebecca wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
Rebecca wrote:The Guardian isn't letting go of the Shapps story,they have a piece ,with photographs of Shapps' solicitors threatening letter to Dean Archer.
Very unpleasant stuff.
I believe Archer should report the lawyer to the Law Society.and do after Shapps,of course.
He certainly shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.
IMO,if Dean Archer is interviewed on TV,Shapps is toast.
Shapps' lawyers demanded compensation and legal costs,the poor guy was scared he would lose his house.Shapps was really abusing his position as mp,ESPECIALLY as Mr Archer wasn't the one lying.
This was certainly not a small mistake.

Dean Archer was on C4 news. He said that he would accept an apology from Shapps - face to face, nothing less.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:23 pm

Had a look at the DCLG reports now - and the splendid blogs which have been commenting on it.

Launch claim - troubled families cost the taxpayer £75,000 each. That's what OGRFG said.

The councils - cost on average is about £40,000. A non-troubled family costs, on average, £12,000.
So that means the real cost is £28,000.
As most of these troubled families had at least one person on DWP benefits, lop off another £4,000 or so.
Being families, they had children, so Child Benefit alone costs £2,000 or so - lop off another chunk.
Being on benefits, they're probably on HB too - average annual cost of that is £5,000.
We're down to £17,000 now.....
The average cost of the new intervention is £5,000 per family.
Down to......the same as a non-troubled family.

Now that can't be right.
One family in the South West was alleged to have cost £290,000 - but that includes various family members being in prison which as we know costs tens of thousands a year.
The councils have different ways of working out the cost, and some do not include police interventions amongst other things; some include things like the cost of NHS care.

There's no question that people in trouble cost more than people who aren't. But the figures given do not add up and do not make sense.

Also, some of the claims made are simply ridiculous. In Salford, it is claimed that alcohol abuse and drug misuse in these families was reduced by 60% and 50% respectively. I find that very difficult to believe, frankly.

The emphasis seems to be to get these troubled families to behave - whilst there are some who are unpleasant people, with evidence of anti-social behaviour, and abuse and violence in the worst cases, they are not all like this.

Some of these families are made up of people who are simply struggling to cope -
71% have someone with at least one serious health problem;
46% have an adult with a chronic mental health problem;
32% have at least one adult with a long-standing disability;
20% have at least one child with a long-standing disability.

What "turning lives around" means is preventing truancy, crime, violence, and substance misuse and the recurring phrase, whatever the problems the family is troubled with, is getting the adults back to work.
As so often, it is worklessness that causes a lot of this, according to this government. Never mind that the picture is complicated by various forms of illness, disability, and good old-fashioned poverty.

I have no idea if this scheme is working, or if it's value for money, or if the existing provision would have done the trick if it had been properly funded. As an ex-worker in a field not unrelated to this, I can only imagine how I'd feel if my department was subject to cut after cut then blamed for failure which is then apparently cured by a new bunch of people brought in by an idiot like Casey.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:28 pm

PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.

Night PF

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:29 pm

Sorry,back to Shapps,but the guardian is modding comments in swathes.Mine got nodded before it was even posted.Seem to be modding out any posts mentioning the liar word.

55DegreesNorth · Post by **55DegreesNorth** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:29 pm

yahyah wrote:Is it too early to start an election playlist over in the Pub ?

My suggestions:

When Labour win:
Glad All Over - Dave Clark 5
I'm So Glad - Cream
I See the Light - Simon Dupree
I Feel Fine - Beatles
This is the Day -Captain Beefheart
The Right Track - Billy Butler
Good Vibrations -Beach Boys

If the Tories win:
Not a Second Time: Beatles
I'm Crying - Animals
We've Gotta Get Out of this Place - Animals
Tears of Rage- The Band
Rescue Me - Fontella Bass
Cry Like a Baby - Box Tops
Bad Moon Rising - Creedence
Ain't That a Shame - Fats Domino
What Am I Going To Do -The Dovers

The lunatics have taken over the asylum?

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:30 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 40 secs41 seconds ago

Electoral Calculus has LAB 55 seats ahead of CON with LAB on 39% chance of majority

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Guardian's poll projection has Tories 15 seats ahead of Labour (281 to 266, SNP 53 LD 24)

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:36 pm

Swarthlander wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:Mind you. I think I probably am a corvidist.
Oh yeh! And just who is going to clean up all the road kill then?
No other bird will do it, it's beneath them, they won't do such 'lowly' jobs.

Being an imperialist I expect the lower classes to get up out of shoebox at twelve o'clock at night and lick road clean wit' tongue.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 16 Mar, 2015 7:36 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Ummm. If a MP having a second job isn't against the rules and it was known he was operating under multiple business names but no particular outcry, why did Shapps set a lawyer on one of his constituents to shut him up?

Its down to timing.
GS has maintained that he did not work in his internet business after he took up his MP post. The guy posted (I think on FB) that he was still doing the 'net business after becoming MP.
GS denied that and threatened to sue. The Guardian has today produced evidence that he was (allegedly) doing the 'net stuff whilst an MP by producing the video of him (allegedly) "selling" in 2006 (I think, not sure of the dates)
All allegedly - ovs.