Monday 23rd March 2015

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:27 pm

From Sparrow's blog:

The Conservatives have put out this statement about Afzal Amin.

Afzal Amin is resigning as Conservative candidate for Dudley North with immediate effect.
Conservative chairman Grant Shapps has welcomed Mr Amin’s decision and thanked him for his work in the past.
That “in the past” in the statement is rather telling. In Conservative politics, Amin doesn’t seem to have a future.
To anyone who has followed this story, or who heard Amin on the Today programme this morning, this announcement will not come as a massive surprise.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/liv ... 60811baca0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:27 pm

StephenDolan wrote:LAP. 33% for Conservatives and Labour.

AK to (pretty please) explain how that tallies with the VI numbers of 214 v 240 respectively?

Fuck only knows, but in the end it's unimportant. The stuff to remember: CMD needs a 5% lead before he can get a majority and it's the polling in the marginals that's important, as that's where the election will be decided, for good or ill, and at the moment, AFAIK, that's heading Labour's way in 9 out of 10 marginals. Win those, and you win, full stop. If the Tories wish to bask in the glory of 20,000 majorities in Buckinghamshire Upon Piddle South East and Dromedary West, that's fine by me: I'll take those marginals any day by a thou or two and watch Miliband form his government.

En Avent!

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:30 pm

ErnstRemarx wrote: I'm really not a great fan of anyone suggesting that they have insider knowledge and refusing to source their alleged knowledge, and even less a fan of name dropping (in effect).

I was directly asked by AngryAsWell whether I had seen Miliband in the flesh. All I did was set out the occasions when I have. I didn't (and don't) claim any great insider knowledge.

hubris (n): excessive pride or self-confidence.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:30 pm

ephemerid wrote:
Way to go Theresa!

How to put people off being school governors 101.

I was a school parent-governor for a while. It's not always easy to get a full complement of people willing to give up their time - and this does take time if you do it properly and commit yourself to the work involved. Parents are busy people and those who do their bit are pretty thin on the ground in my experience. It's not that onerous, but it is a commitment.

I don't know how happy I'd have been to do what I saw as a community service if I'd been put on a government list and subject to snooping into my religious affairs (not that I have any) or checked me against other databases.

This is daft, Roger.

Yes it is.

The Education Funding Agency got a kicking from all sides as they're nowhere near resourced enough to do what they do now let alone (i) take far more academies on and (ii) manage this list.

I heard from a governor source on twitter that all academies have to send minutes of every meeting into the EFA!

Gove's actions have set in place a central bureaucracy at the same point that all other departments are getting rid of them.

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:31 pm

ErnstRemarx wrote:...

The only thing that should be mandatory, in my less than humble, is a CRB check. End of. Anything else starts to look like state snooping, and christ knows we don't need to get Henry Porter any more excuses to start writing more more shit civil liberties articles for Rubbisher do we?

I would add the financial limitations that already apply too, Ernst.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:33 pm

ErnstRemarx wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
Rebecca wrote:Secondly Citizen,I really feel uncomfortable with anyone pushing at posters here to reveal their identity.
Well so do I for that matter - I have fairly trenchant views about education policy as everyone knows but I am a serving chair of governors and keep my political opinions very much out of any meetings.

But I fail to see how answering a simple question about how SH knew or saw Miliband 25 years ago while Ed was at university could possibly reveal his identity given the hundreds of people who similarly went to Oxford at the same time. Bear in mind that it was SH himself who volunteered this information yesterday in a "I know more than you people" way.
In that, I concur. If SH went to Oxford (taught, lived or studied there, university or Brookes) there's nothing that can link his stating so to his real identity, I would suggest.

Now. Having said that, I'm really not a great fan of anyone suggesting that they have insider knowledge and refusing to source their alleged knowledge, and even less a fan of name dropping (in effect). I could do it - as I discussed with Tom Watson MP when we were out door knocking in Ramsbottom the other week - but I generally don't unless they are my source for a particular piece of information or germane to the point I'm seeking to make. I've actually met a fair few MPs by now (because of the circles I move in), and I imagine others have too, but it's pointless to try and big oneself up by mentioning it for no reason, because it makes you look like a wannabee and why anyone would seek to do that with FTNers is beyond me, as it would undoubtedly backfire. Hubris isn't a good look and namedropping is hubris writ large, as I told Franklyn Roosevelt before I was born.

On a rather happier note, I was out with the local candidate for our ward delivering leaflets on Saturday, and I was a little relieved to find out that he's sick to the back teeth of the 'organisation' he's been getting within the CLP. My perception has been for a while that this is possibly the worst organised campaign I've ever taken part in, both for the locals and the general election. I'm not quite sure who's sorted out the leaflet deliveries and the door knocking schedules, but it's either Curly, Larry or Mo, whilst the separation of the local and general campaigns is a palpably stupid decision which will not end well, IMHO. Any road up, I've told said local candidate to fuck 'em off, and we'll do it our way, which attentive readers will know I did in 2012 when I got elected. I wrote all my own leaflets and delivered a mass of them to boot, unencumbered by the demands of the CLP. I'll let you know how we get on.

Good point well made (1st.Para)
I would have you know that I have personally wiped the somethings of both Lord Whitelaw and one M.Heseltine; thrown Gerald Kaufmann out of my resus room when he demanded special treatment; and put a plaster on the scaphoid fracture of Merlyn Rees.
And the slebs! OMG!!!!!! The bombs!!!! The riots!!!!
Stories I could tell.......we could all play, I'm sure.
(I'll stop now)

We're off to a talk tonight (2nd.Para - this is all a bit military...) and a Q&A with Matthew Dorrance, our PPC. He's terrific, but I don't think he'll win. He's got a CLP handler who will remain nameless, but has this irritating habit of marching up to people when they arrive at things and insisting they meet Matthew (by blocking him out of view and being hearty) never bothering to find out if they know him.
It's quite funny when he (Matt) peeks round and say "Hello, X".
Brecon and Radnor is a huge constituency geographically, (from us here on the border to Ystradgynlais in the Upper Swansea Valley) and I have to say that the various local groups have worked really hard to get Matt known everywhere. He was the Mayor of Brecon for a bit, so he's known around here, but he has a lot of ground to cover over the next few weeks as he intends to do it all again.

I suspect there won't be all that many there tonight. There are only 5 of us in the Hay & Talgarth local party, so I'm expecting a very short evening out....

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:34 pm

utopiandreams wrote:
ErnstRemarx wrote:...

The only thing that should be mandatory, in my less than humble, is a CRB check. End of. Anything else starts to look like state snooping, and christ knows we don't need to get Henry Porter any more excuses to start writing more more shit civil liberties articles for Rubbisher do we?
I would add the financial limitations that already apply too, Ernst.

Oh, OK, useful I grant you.

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:40 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
ErnstRemarx wrote: I'm really not a great fan of anyone suggesting that they have insider knowledge and refusing to source their alleged knowledge, and even less a fan of name dropping (in effect).
I was directly asked by AngryAsWell whether I had seen Miliband in the flesh. All I did was set out the occasions when I have. I didn't (and don't) claim any great insider knowledge.

hubris (n): excessive pride or self-confidence.

I've no problem with that, but if you say that you met/saw him 25 years back - it was 25 wasn't it? - then people will, given his age, assume that it may well have been at Oxford University. I'm sure you get that. I think that was all that people were asking you - did you meet/know him at Oxford? - in which case a simple yes no answer would have ensured that more than one or two of today's post would either never have seen the light of day or would have been on rather different subjects.

Now then - what's your opinion of the lamb Henry? Being Lancashire based, I'm inclined to think that it beats the living shit out of a sirloin steak, but I'm open to your opinion.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:55 pm

Afternoon !

Great to see you RR2 with the report from Preseli-Pembrokeshire on hustings.
Hope to see more when you are able to post.

We've had our first election communications arrive today.

Plaid's masquerades as a local newpaper free sheet, with headlines about a poll boost for their candidate, which turns out to actually be about Ladbroke betting odds for him getting a boost.
Not sure how mention of gambling will go down in what is still very much a Chapel area.
But lots of good lefty buzz words and of course that he 'marched against the Iraq war'.

Mark Williams' leaflet has a small Lib Dem bird logo and one small mention of the Lib Dems in the text.
Not a word about the Lib Dem proud record in government, wonder why that is ?
It has the feel of a council election leaflet, not someone standing for a place in national government.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:56 pm

Here is the evidence that Paxman is biased & should not be moderating the TV debate, imo:

Jeremy Paxman, the former Newsnight presenter who is interviewing David Cameron and Ed Miliband on Thursday night, has been speaking at an advertising conference today. He doesn’t seem to rate the Labour leader’s TV skills highly, according to the Times’s Sam Coates.

Series of tweets by Sam Coates:

Paxman: Doesn't know how election will end. But "I get the sense things running the Tories way"

Paxman confirms he was tapped up as candidate for Kensington and Chelsea as well as Mayor of London

(Phone battery went dead).
Paxman asked to name leaders whose TV performances he admired / rated. Names Hammond, Hague, Cameron.

... When it's pointed out that he forgot Ed Miliband, Paxman replied: "How astute" (to notice).

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:58 pm

After a somewhat fractious day, I offer this peace offering

"Voting Conservative is like making love to a beautiful woman..."

https://electionleaflets.org/leaflets/8932/

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 4:59 pm

Those of you who are interested in the Jobcentre offering IAPT/MH services, the report on the pilot is out.

I've only has a quick skim - but the numbers are half what was expected and it seems the (unqualified) jobcentre staff misunderstood the referral criteria. Surprise surprise.
There is evidence that some claimants only signed up because they thought they might get the treatment they need a bit sooner now that the NHS waiting lists are so long!

One thing stood out - apparently some of the claimants referred were inappropriate because they were already having therapy or because their condition was too severe for the type of therapy on offer.

Which begs the questions - why are people currently going through psychiatric treatment being hassled to work, and what are people with "severe" mental health problems doing in a fucking Jobcentre?

The results are appalling. The drop-out rate is very high; the parallel services (ie. what the claimants are supposed to be sent to if they agree to do this) weren't available to them (probably because they were already on the waiting list for them or they'd been cut); and the idea that all these services would link up with local employers etc. was a pipe dream.
The recommendations are that the pilot is extended and that it is basically redrawn from scratch with a much much longer preparation period.
Of course, this won't happen. It will be a success, because IDS will decree it so - and anyway, Osborne wants to get 40,000 people on therapy because he said so in his budget. Subject to sanctions, obviously.

What a mess.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 5:12 pm

pk1 wrote:Here is the evidence that Paxman is biased & should not be moderating the TV debate, imo:

Jeremy Paxman, the former Newsnight presenter who is interviewing David Cameron and Ed Miliband on Thursday night, has been speaking at an advertising conference today. He doesn’t seem to rate the Labour leader’s TV skills highly, according to the Times’s Sam Coates.
Series of tweets by Sam Coates:

Paxman: Doesn't know how election will end. But "I get the sense things running the Tories way"

Paxman confirms he was tapped up as candidate for Kensington and Chelsea as well as Mayor of London

(Phone battery went dead).
Paxman asked to name leaders whose TV performances he admired / rated. Names Hammond, Hague, Cameron.

... When it's pointed out that he forgot Ed Miliband, Paxman replied: "How astute" (to notice).

I don't know Paxman. I've never watched his program.

I've known professional people able to remain impartial, or at least be able to follow guidelines & rules, while auditing the performances of people they don't rate highly or have openly opposed. I'm uncertain how general this is true in the media at Paxman's level.

From what I've gathered here & elsewhere, Paxman's disregard for the Labour party leader & his own Tory support are cause for concern. What will be expected of Paxman regarding the leaders' debates?

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 5:22 pm

citizenJA wrote:
pk1 wrote:Here is the evidence that Paxman is biased & should not be moderating the TV debate, imo:

Jeremy Paxman, the former Newsnight presenter who is interviewing David Cameron and Ed Miliband on Thursday night, has been speaking at an advertising conference today. He doesn’t seem to rate the Labour leader’s TV skills highly, according to the Times’s Sam Coates.
Series of tweets by Sam Coates:

Paxman: Doesn't know how election will end. But "I get the sense things running the Tories way"

Paxman confirms he was tapped up as candidate for Kensington and Chelsea as well as Mayor of London

(Phone battery went dead).
Paxman asked to name leaders whose TV performances he admired / rated. Names Hammond, Hague, Cameron.

... When it's pointed out that he forgot Ed Miliband, Paxman replied: "How astute" (to notice).
I don't know Paxman. I've never watched his program.

I've known professional people able to remain impartial, or at least be able to follow guidelines & rules, while auditing the performances of people they don't rate highly or have openly opposed. I'm uncertain how general this is true in the media at Paxman's level.

From what I've gathered here & elsewhere, Paxman's disregard for the Labour party leader & his own Tory support are cause for concern. What will be expected of Paxman regarding the leaders' debates?

The fact that Paxo outed himself as a Tory should, IMO, disqualify him from interviewing Miliband. I would far prefer someone whose politics I don't know and cannot guess from their on screen work.

I'm still surprised that the various meeja appear to have gone belly up over the debates. It was quite simple; three debates - two pointless 7 person slanging matches, and then the one that mattered between Miliband and the puce faced fucktard. Quite simple, and if he wouldn't show, empty chair him and then do an interview with Miliband. That they've rolled over is distinctly bad news in my opinion, and I'm very surprised they're not getting a pile of shit for it. Cameron bottled it, but they simply compounded it and it's not to the credit of any of them.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 5:30 pm

Andrew Neil is a Tory, and he is the best political interviewer and journalist on TV (thin competition, arguably).

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 5:35 pm

ephemerid wrote:Those of you who are interested in the Jobcentre offering IAPT/MH services, the report on the pilot is out.

I've only has a quick skim - but the numbers are half what was expected and it seems the (unqualified) jobcentre staff misunderstood the referral criteria. Surprise surprise.
There is evidence that some claimants only signed up because they thought they might get the treatment they need a bit sooner now that the NHS waiting lists are so long!

One thing stood out - apparently some of the claimants referred were inappropriate because they were already having therapy or because their condition was too severe for the type of therapy on offer.

Which begs the questions - why are people currently going through psychiatric treatment being hassled to work, and what are people with "severe" mental health problems doing in a fucking Jobcentre?

The results are appalling. The drop-out rate is very high; the parallel services (ie. what the claimants are supposed to be sent to if they agree to do this) weren't available to them (probably because they were already on the waiting list for them or they'd been cut); and the idea that all these services would link up with local employers etc. was a pipe dream.
The recommendations are that the pilot is extended and that it is basically redrawn from scratch with a much much longer preparation period.
Of course, this won't happen. It will be a success, because IDS will decree it so - and anyway, Osborne wants to get 40,000 people on therapy because he said so in his budget. Subject to sanctions, obviously.

What a mess.

Mmm, I did say enough self-publicity the other day, ephemerid, but given the context perhaps this anecdote is worth a mention.

Some time back when I eventually lost my OU work a couple or so years after losing my wife; I'd already stopped seeking new clients whilst she lay paralysed in a nursing home, there was my back too. Anyway I'd been to the Job Centre and was turned away because of my savings (still had my daughter with me - sons too but they're not relevant in this context). Some savings, the residual after selling the family home. I did explain that I still had some of my wife's debts to clear but was sent away nevertheless. Later on when I was running out of cash (my last thousand) I was back.

By now I was seriously depressed and cannot remember what exactly transpired but explained that I would not claim ISA for my daughter as she was moving in a couple of weeks; to a lovely couple who look after two other young adults with learning difficulties. They were already my daughter's friends and the woman had used to work at the Day Centre they all attend. Anyway I was leaving having been pushed the ICA forms, which I wasn't going to complete. Whether or not is was my facial expression or my body language but I was summoned back in by another as I left.

She and the support worker I was introduced to probably saved my life; they also contacted the mental health team. I was probably too proud to accept my depression and would not claim ESA. Part of my refusal was my appreciation for the help and support that both my wife and daughter had received, one a stroke victim and the other with Downs. I therefore claimed JSA but always lived in fear of sanction. I really have to thank my support worker for protecting me although I was becoming mighty close before I signed off. That is why I have often been defensive on behalf of DWP staff in the other place. Although as you can probably understand I don't hold such feelings for all of them.

Anyway thanks for the eyes up, I am interested.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 5:39 pm

Who you gonna choose? Paxman? Humphrys? Marr? Boulton? Dimbleby? They're all bastard Tories! Eddie Mair is about the only one I can think of. That's why I got rid of my TV licence.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 5:44 pm

Another entry to the Brave New World of education and what academies want, academies get.

A Twitter exchange alerted me to this.

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

Schools get go ahead to change the system

http://www.redditchstandard.co.uk/2015/ ... 29718.html

The three-tier education system in Redditch has been torn up after two schools were given permission to adopt the two tier-system.

Both Tudor Grange Academy Redditch and Ridgeway Middle School have been given the go-ahead by the Regionals Schools Commissioner.

It means that Tudor Grange Academy Redditch would take pupils from the age of 11 instead of 13 from September 2016 from feeder primary schools, which in turn would have pupils up to Year 6.

The current system in the borough has first schools from Year 1 to 4, middle schools from Year 5-8 and high schools up to the age of 16 or older with a sixth form.

There you go - two academies want to go to two-tier system and because the Gove-appointed Regional Commissioner says it's OK, they drive a coach and horses through the local education system which means that all schools have to fall into line - never mind what the local people want. I seem to recall there was talk of this happening elsewhere - Norfolk maybe?

utopiandreams · Post by **utopiandreams** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 5:56 pm

frightful_oik wrote:Who you gonna choose? Paxman? Humphrys? Marr? Boulton? Dimbleby? They're all bastard Tories! Eddie Mair is about the only one I can think of. That's why I got rid of my TV licence.

Personally I'd favour Stephen Sackur, frightful_oik. He has an understated manner without raising interviewees' hackles, but is nevertheless forensic in his questioning. Neither does he interrupt too often thereby reducing their shouting over him. Who can tell when Cameron's involved though judging by those he's happy to stand by... not to mention his commander-in-chief, Crosby.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:03 pm

Utopian Dreams - I worked in a jobcentre for a while.

I can think of quite a few really good people who would do their best to help - but things are very different now and most of those people left.
I am sure you had the help you needed, and good for those staff who recognised your distress for what it was.

I have no idea if that is a regular occurrence now. But I doubt it.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:08 pm

utopiandreams wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Who you gonna choose? Paxman? Humphrys? Marr? Boulton? Dimbleby? They're all bastard Tories! Eddie Mair is about the only one I can think of. That's why I got rid of my TV licence.
Personally I'd favour Stephen Sackur, frightful_oik. He has an understated manner without raising interviewees' hackles, but is nevertheless forensic in his questioning. Neither does he interrupt too often thereby reducing their shouting over him. Who can tell when Cameron's involved though judging by those he's happy to stand by... not to mention his commander-in-chief, Crosby.

Had to look him up but do recognise him now and agree he would be good - better than Paxman, a lot better.

@Spinning - Mr AAW holds same view as you on A Niel, but he just leaves me screaming at the telly with his repetitive questioning and interruptions, have to agree he does do his research and knows his stuff.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:16 pm

I read Krugman's NYT article, although I think this is a slightly different version, for some reason

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/opini ... ef=opinion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

followed a link to this, Wren-Lewis is always worth reading

http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2015/ ... omics.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and then this. UK Budget 2015: Fragility lies beneath a bright outlook Martin Wolf

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/aa9d25f2-cd69 ... z3UdCrSe88" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

which includes this

The question remains why it is important to run a surplus on the current budget of 1.7 per cent of GDP by 2019-20, which would also cover all public investment. Given that the UK has no difficulty in borrowing at exceptionally low nominal (and negative real) rates of interest the decision to avoid borrowing altogether is hard to justify. It would be reasonable to run a balanced current budget at the end of the next parliament and borrow to invest. Indeed, it would be reasonable to borrow to invest yet more than planned. Moreover, if it were essential to run an overall surplus, it would be sensible to raise taxation a bit rather than rely on spending cuts alone.

A succinct description of Labour's economic policy, I'd say. Why can't Wolf bring himself to say it?

And then he ends

Mr Osborne is a shrewd political tactician. He has made the best of what is, in truth, not that strong a hand. Politically, his strongest claim is that the economy is improving. This being so, it would, he argues, be folly to hand it over to those who were in charge when it hit the rocks so spectacularly. That is a good argument.

It might be a good argument in Torymedialand but it's a complete non sequitur to the rest of the article.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:18 pm

So Cameron rules out a third term in office.

He hasn't won a second yet.

diGriz · Post by **diGriz** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:21 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:Andrew Neil is a Tory, and he is the best political interviewer and journalist on TV (thin competition, arguably).

James O'Brien if you ask me.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:21 pm

Interesting piece in the Indie, not altogether a surprise maybe.

Royal family member was investigated as part of paedophile ring before cover-up, ex-cop says
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 26864.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:46 pm

letsskiptotheleft wrote:So Cameron rules out a third term in office.

He hasn't won a second yet.

Mike Smithson would presumably call this a Sheffield rally moment for Dave?

Post by **refitman** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 6:53 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:After a somewhat fractious day, I offer this peace offering

"Voting Conservative is like making love to a beautiful woman..."

https://electionleaflets.org/leaflets/8932/

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 7:08 pm

Spinning Hugo, International Man of Mystery*, is a deep undercover operative of the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Affairs and Tractors (MaGRAT) who travels the world's fairgrounds with his Waltzers, holding secretive meetings with powerful movers and shakers in his specially adapted tea-cup, and forcing them to spill the beans and whatever else they've eaten by pressing a concealed button which makes said tea-cup spin at a specific resonant-spin-frequency** so saving the world and getting the girl. He is a great-great-great-great-great grandson of the infamous Spinning Jenny, who made her fortune manufacturing yarns, in a range of republican colours, which she sold to Les Tricoteuses{/i] from her stall beside the guillotine. Not a lot of people know that. And that, is The Truth™***

*and phenomenally handsome babe-magnet, leanly muscled, tanned, with smoky green eyes and long black hair... swoon... oh, sorry, where was I?
**which is fiendishly difficult to explain but scientifically accurate
***GNU_TP****
****look it up...

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 7:19 pm

I have to take back what I said yesterday about the BBC and Clive Myrie. He's scheduled to do the newspaper review tonight. I wonder if he'll come up to snuff?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 7:24 pm

Sorry about being, lately, more disconnected than usual. I've been doing 'phone canvassing - my opinion of its value hasn't changed but it was fun (if that's the right word). No doubt there'll be more but for now I'm off the hook (as were a lot of the 'phones I tried ringing).

Spacedone · Post by **Spacedone** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 7:31 pm

Remember when Blair announced he wasn't going to stand for re-election again and from that point on the media, regardless of the event, policy announcement etc wouldn't stop speculating about it, questioning Labour about when he'd resign etc? Those same journos are now downplaying Cameron doing exactly the same thing.

Post by **refitman** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 7:53 pm

Tim Montgomerie نVerified account ‏@montie

Exclusive pic of Lynton Crosby hearing news about Cameron going off message and discussing what might happen in 2020

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:01 pm

I've read a post elsewhere advising voters to vote for what we believe in.
That's potentially 50,000,000 different results very roughly based upon electorate size.
So many individual voices, where's the unity? Where is unity, common ground, common goals extolled as a virtue these days?
I get called 'tribal' rallying friends with my Labour policy documents & stickers affixed to the reports.

Another commentator wrote they'd not be voting until there was proportional representation (PR) available.
How is that was going to happen without voter participation?
I understand democracy requires a lot more than voting every few years.
Nonetheless, voting is essential.

general election 2015
The next UK Parliamentary general election takes place on Thursday 7 May 2015.
Your vote matters, make sure you’re in
If you want to have your say at the general election, you must be registered to vote.
You can register to vote online at http://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote.

http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/upcoming-e ... l-election

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:08 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Michael Deacon ‏@MichaelPDeacon · 15m15 minutes ago
Burst of excitement as Sky News breaks away for the weather #AskTheChancellors

#AskTheChancellors is on - missed Osborne but looks like not missed much
Ed Ball next

Oh buggerage! I forgot about those and missed them

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:10 pm

Re school governors, the government isn't interested in them. They get in the way of academy chain placemen.

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:14 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Re school governors, the government isn't interested in them. They get in the way of academy chain placemen.

Very true. Better to have a board of directors.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:14 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:Spinning Hugo, International Man of Mystery*, is a deep undercover operative of the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Affairs and Tractors (MaGRAT) who travels the world's fairgrounds with his Waltzers, holding secretive meetings with powerful movers and shakers in his specially adapted tea-cup, and forcing them to spill the beans and whatever else they've eaten by pressing a concealed button which makes said tea-cup spin at a specific resonant-spin-frequency** so saving the world and getting the girl. He is a great-great-great-great-great grandson of the infamous Spinning Jenny, who made her fortune manufacturing yarns, in a range of republican colours, which she sold to Les Tricoteuses{/i] from her stall beside the guillotine. Not a lot of people know that. And that, is The Truth™***

*and phenomenally handsome babe-magnet, leanly muscled, tanned, with smoky green eyes and long black hair... swoon... oh, sorry, where was I?
**which is fiendishly difficult to explain but scientifically accurate
***GNU_TP****
****look it up...

I'm not sure this is particularly helpful after today's problems. I'm not a fan of Hugo's but he has every right to his privacy and every right not to answer questions as everyone else.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:21 pm

Goodnight, everyone.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:38 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
LadyCentauria wrote:Spinning Hugo, International Man of Mystery*, is a deep undercover operative of the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Affairs and Tractors (MaGRAT) who travels the world's fairgrounds with his Waltzers, holding secretive meetings with powerful movers and shakers in his specially adapted tea-cup, and forcing them to spill the beans and whatever else they've eaten by pressing a concealed button which makes said tea-cup spin at a specific resonant-spin-frequency** so saving the world and getting the girl. He is a great-great-great-great-great grandson of the infamous Spinning Jenny, who made her fortune manufacturing yarns, in a range of republican colours, which she sold to Les Tricoteuses{/i] from her stall beside the guillotine. Not a lot of people know that. And that, is The Truth™***

*and phenomenally handsome babe-magnet, leanly muscled, tanned, with smoky green eyes and long black hair... swoon... oh, sorry, where was I?
**which is fiendishly difficult to explain but scientifically accurate
***GNU_TP****
****look it up...

I'm not sure this is particularly helpful after today's problems. I'm not a fan of Hugo's but he has every right to his privacy and every right not to answer questions as everyone else.

I do agree with this.Why are people attacking SH so much today?Disagree with the points he makes,or if he pisses you off so much scroll past his posts.He was made welcome here,is polite and honest in his views,and I have seen nothing he has written here to warrant any of this.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:39 pm

PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.

goodnight, PF

Hobiejoe · Post by **Hobiejoe** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 8:41 pm

Just a thought, but perhaps this Cameron to step down stuff is an attempt to give the party some sort of bounce similar to that that Major got when he replaced Thatcher, but without the chaos of a defenestration.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 9:07 pm

Letters - Austerity policies a disaster for majority

"In what we hope was his last budget, George Osborne made a series of false claims about his economic record (Editorial, 20 March).
The reality is that his priority is to raise profits for the corporations, top executive salaries and bonuses, at the expense of ordinary working people."

[further text of letter on website link below]

First 14-15 names signed to the letter posted in the Guardian below

Len McCluskey Unite
Mark Serwotka PCS
Christine Blower NUT
Mick Whelan Aslef
Sally Hunt UCU
Manuel Cortez TSSA
Billy Hayes CWU
Dave Green FBU
John Smith Musicians Union
Steve Gillan POA
Dianne Abbott MP
John McDonnell MP
Jeremy Corbyn MP
Katy Clark MP
Dave Anderson MP

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... r-majority

Hobiejoe · Post by **Hobiejoe** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 9:17 pm

Rebecca wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:
LadyCentauria wrote:Spinning Hugo, International Man of Mystery*, is a deep undercover operative of the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Affairs and Tractors (MaGRAT) who travels the world's fairgrounds with his Waltzers, holding secretive meetings with powerful movers and shakers in his specially adapted tea-cup, and forcing them to spill the beans and whatever else they've eaten by pressing a concealed button which makes said tea-cup spin at a specific resonant-spin-frequency** so saving the world and getting the girl. He is a great-great-great-great-great grandson of the infamous Spinning Jenny, who made her fortune manufacturing yarns, in a range of republican colours, which she sold to Les Tricoteuses{/i] from her stall beside the guillotine. Not a lot of people know that. And that, is The Truth™***

*and phenomenally handsome babe-magnet, leanly muscled, tanned, with smoky green eyes and long black hair... swoon... oh, sorry, where was I?
**which is fiendishly difficult to explain but scientifically accurate
***GNU_TP****
****look it up...

I'm not sure this is particularly helpful after today's problems. I'm not a fan of Hugo's but he has every right to his privacy and every right not to answer questions as everyone else.

I do agree with this.Why are people attacking SH so much today?Disagree with the points he makes,or if he pisses you off so much scroll past his posts.He was made welcome here,is polite and honest in his views,and I have seen nothing he has written here to warrant any of this.

I rather read it as an entertaining piece of whimsy, making light of a situation, and maybe intended to diffuse tensions.

Of course FTN is a welcoming place, this is why I enjoy it, mainly as a lurker, I'm afraid. But I can also see why the odd member may raise an online eyebrow at SH's beliefs, motivations and intentions. Sadly I'm not particularly attuned to nuance, or sometimes even clonking obviocity (not a word? I still like it), so I shall just watch with interest from here on in.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 9:26 pm

This made me chuckle you may already have seen it

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 9:30 pm

Good letter, though Abbott made false austerity claims about the IFS charter.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 9:32 pm

Hobiejoe wrote:
Rebecca wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:

I'm not sure this is particularly helpful after today's problems. I'm not a fan of Hugo's but he has every right to his privacy and every right not to answer questions as everyone else.

I do agree with this.Why are people attacking SH so much today?Disagree with the points he makes,or if he pisses you off so much scroll past his posts.He was made welcome here,is polite and honest in his views,and I have seen nothing he has written here to warrant any of this.

I rather read it as an entertaining piece of whimsy, making light of a situation, and maybe intended to diffuse tensions.

Of course FTN is a welcoming place, this is why I enjoy it, mainly as a lurker, I'm afraid. But I can also see why the odd member may raise an online eyebrow at SH's beliefs, motivations and intentions. Sadly I'm not particularly attuned to nuance, or sometimes even clonking obviocity (not a word? I still like it), so I shall just watch with interest from here on in.

Thank you, @Hobiejoe. That was the exactly spirit in which my silly sense of humour led me to write the piece. However, if the mods/admins feel it should be expunged from the record I will, of course, delete it.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 9:45 pm

Public Accounts Committee

Tax avoidance and evasion: HSBC
Witnesses: Dave Hartnett, former Permanent Secretary for Tax, HM Revenue and Customs;
Edward Troup, Second Permanent Secretary and Tax Assurance Commissioner, HM Revenue and Customs.

Monday 23 March 2015 Meeting started at 3.25pm, ended 5.35pm

http://goo.gl/I2QgEa

Dave Hartnett, former Permanent Secretary for Tax, HM Revenue and Customs

“I would like to understand – and I don’t as I sit here – why there weren’t more criminal prosecutions. I had always expected there to be more,” he said.

“I am three years out of it so I don’t have that information. I would like to understand what difference would have been made had more resources been applied to the Falciani data.

“If you look round the world, I think only Ireland and the UK have prosecuted anyone from the Falciani list. That looks like a fairly miserable result. Someone should have a really good look at whether any of that could be done differently.”

Edward Troup, Second Permanent Secretary and Tax Assurance Commissioner, HM Revenue and Customs

"His comments were rejected by the current HMRC tax assurance commissioner, Edward Troup, who insisted that they had been “diligent” in pursuing the information which they had received from the French.

“I was quite surprised to hear him make that statement. I don’t think there is anything there which suggests that we have not been diligent,” he told the committee."

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/ma ... rosecution" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Look a

We don't have the transcript yet, just the Parliamentary broadcast I've not watched yet.
There's just the G article to quote from I've linked above.
What an innocuous quote from Edward Troup - 'We did all we could, couldn't have done more, that's a fact, I am surprised I am indeed to hear Hartnett talk so...'

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 9:49 pm

Evening Peeps.

Having left the house spitting with apoplectic rage and with steam coming out of my ears after the 11-minute Party Political Broadcast on the BBC 6 o'clock news (more of which later) I went to hear my PPC speak.

He was very good; delivered a good passionate but very locally-based talk; outlined Labour policy very clearly; and described Ed as a statesman citing his work on climate change and his stance on Syria.
There were about 25 people there (which is actually more than was expected) and we had a lot of questions which Matthew answered very well. He knows the local area very well, and I thought he did good.

Back to the Beeb - I am really angry and I intend to complain to the BBC. Not only did they lead with this bilge and keep it going for far too long, they went back to Landale in Downing St. halfway through then referred to it again in the headlines at the end.
Less than a minute on Amin. Absolutely outrageous.

LadyC - I read it as intended.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 10:15 pm

Thank you, @Hobiejoe. That was the exactly spirit in which my silly sense of humour led me to write the piece

To me it came across as someone in a room, talking in a loud voice, surrounded by friends taking the p$ss out of a person, knowing their target could hear them but would be unlikely to challenge them. In other words, bullying.
Hugo had reached out a hand with a link to a funny article, the disagreements were starting to be smoothed over. Your mocking post did nothing to help that healing. There is a place for humour. In the middle of a disagreement is not it - esp when one party has reached out to end it.
Others disagree with me on this, I wrote to a moderator and got no reply, so I am obviously in the wrong place. Leave your mocking, bullying post be, but I won't stay around to see more of it.

Been nice knowing you all and I will miss being here for the election but I cannot stay in a place where people are mocked in this way - for the crime of posting on a public forum.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Mon 23 Mar, 2015 10:27 pm

anne mcelvoy @annemcelvoy

"Tory minister jokes about people on benefits at fundraiser". First Mr Amin, then Cam's blooper and now @HugoSwire scores a third own goal

I'd like to see Ed Miliband's Labour win the election, but I'm quite happy for the Tories to give it away if they prefer. And on that note I'm off to bed. Night all.