Wednesday 20th May 2015

[tinyclanger2]

God how I hate nationalism.

[citizenJA]

A note attached to my post addressed to Ashcroft & his omniously pointing out UKIP's second places - I don't underestimate the danger of UKIP. They're not a left wing party & if people are voting for them thinking they are, they've made a mistake. Millions of people voted for UKIP in the GE 2015 - I take that seriously. I don't like how Ashcroft uses his power, resources & influence. That's my opinion. It's an aside, really, so what? I don't trust Ashcroft or his motives. It doesn't mean I think everything he says or writes is wrong.

The tweet RR2 posted up the thread from Faisal Islam contains a valuable link to the GE 2015 election results. I've not finished reading & absorbing it all yet.

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ ... fullreport" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

God how I hate nationalism.

Me too.

[seeingclearly]

DWP Forced To Apologise After Terminally Ill Benefit Claimant Tried To Take His Own Life
http://www.welfareweekly.com/dwp-forced ... -own-life/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Awful story - as so many are. Glad it was resolved without this person actually losing their life.

However, the letter of apology from the DWP contains a phrase - euphemism - I find chilling. It says:
'...you should never have been selected to begin this journey to transfer over from Incapacity Benefit to Employment Support Allowance... '
and later
'... you should never have been selected to begin this journey and the journey was ended.'

Journey? FFS. Call it a process or a transfer or a shift. But 'journey'? Who do they think they fool with this nicey-nicey nasty language?

It also seemed to imply there was some kind of choice in the matter. But if you aware sick or disabled these are not choices, except to remain on JSA, ie the lowest support level, where you are at the mercy of some person deciding to sanction you for usually no good reason.

[rebeccariots2]

Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 3m3 minutes ago
EXCL: Senior Labour MP Sadiq Khan says "voters are bastards” for rejecting his pal Ed Miliband http://www.sunnation.co.uk/senior-labou ... e-bstards/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Glad we're going out soon.

[ephemerid]

The execrable Mensch has now informed us that the reason why she is currently suspending her non-bullying of Abby Tomlinson is because Abby has exams.

What she has not chosen to tell us is when the barrage of loaded questions, nasty remarks, and sheer bad manners will cease altogether - with an apology.

Why is she getting away with this?

[citizenJA]

Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 3m3 minutes ago
EXCL: Senior Labour MP Sadiq Khan says "voters are bastards” for rejecting his pal Ed Miliband http://www.sunnation.co.uk/senior-labou ... e-bstards/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Glad we're going out soon.

I've not had the opportunity to ask Khan if that's what he said or not. I've no idea if Tom Dunn accurately represented Khan's words. I doubt it. Does anyone know?

[citizenJA]

The execrable Mensch has now informed us that the reason why she is currently suspending her non-bullying of Abby Tomlinson is because Abby has exams.

What she has not chosen to tell us is when the barrage of loaded questions, nasty remarks, and sheer bad manners will cease altogether - with an apology.

Why is she getting away with this?

Good question. I think this is against the law, isn't it? The girl isn't an adult.

[seeingclearly]

I'm somewhat confused about Ukip. It's true that they have a great deal of support, and that probably won't be changing any time soon. Yet they had a chance to break away from essentially being The Nigel Farage Show and his backing dancers, and blew it. Whatever you think about Natalie Bennett (I neither like nor rate her), Caroline Lucas stepping down as leader definitely had the effect of moving the Greens away from being a one-man band. I find it hard to see how Ukip will now escape from 'Ukip=Farage and Farage=Ukip', and that has to hurt their long term prospects.

Nevertheless they have much more widespread support than UKIP and BNP put together had five years ago, and I've seen a fair few people admit to having voted that way, some of them in a misguided belief that 'they aren't really right wing, they are more left than the left.' Yes, my jaw dropped too. But in the lull after the election their activists were still active, and still are, trying to actively recruit people. So there's an agenda there, though I do wonder whether the chance to open the party up failed because the bunch they've got at the top are likely to be media fails, and would fail to bring the votes Farage does, or be able to domnate debates the way he can. Of courśe there's always the chance he's been told to rein things in, though it's unlikely.

I'm very concerned about Ukip. Their vote was well up across Wales. We have Assembly elections here next year. We have PR.

My main objection to PR is that it allows minority parties a bigger voice. While this might seem anti democratic it isn't really. The majority are already represented in FPTP when you combine opposition and government. I worry that a further breakdown of Britain into regional bodies will give similar outcomes as ?Wales, ie PR and a toxic kind of regionalism that will lead to breakdown of cohesion and fragmented communities. We are not Scandinavia, we do not have a stable situation. I first realised just how bad things were when someone posted that Wales has more UKIP than PLAID. Very worrying, for both social and assembly reasons.

[ephemerid]

DWP Forced To Apologise After Terminally Ill Benefit Claimant Tried To Take His Own Life
http://www.welfareweekly.com/dwp-forced ... -own-life/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Awful story - as so many are. Glad it was resolved without this person actually losing their life.

However, the letter of apology from the DWP contains a phrase - euphemism - I find chilling. It says:
'...you should never have been selected to begin this journey to transfer over from Incapacity Benefit to Employment Support Allowance... '
and later
'... you should never have been selected to begin this journey and the journey was ended.'

Journey? FFS. Call it a process or a transfer or a shift. But 'journey'? Who do they think they fool with this nicey-nicey nasty language?

If you are Freud, the claimant in question would be referred to as "stock" and people on long-term IB awaiting "migration" to ESA would be called "the stockpile".

If you work for DWP, your instructions are to ensure that IB claimants are re-assessed irrespective of the severity of their illness, and they must be tested using the WCA before "migration" can occur.

Even though the rules are that people who are claiming only NI credits (ie. those who have either run out of ESA WRAG entitlement because they have claimed IB or ESA for a year or more, applied retrospectively) do not have to have a WCA and can be moved from Ib conts only to ESA conts only, they are invariably ignored.

The claimant in the article should not have been on conts-only - as a person with a 2 year Support Group award, they should have been getting full rate, not means-tested, from the date of the WCA which determined SG status. SG claimants are never conts-only.
There is something not quite right about the contents of the letter copied into that article, and not just in terms of its language.

"Journey" my arse.

DWP letters to claimants should use the same terminology our leaders do. These people are not customers on a journey.
They are stock being migrated.

I should know - I am one of them. Moo.

[Eric_WLothian]

So, Grexit, Brexit, um, Scexit? Those for Scottish independence = 'Skeksies' and those for EU exit = ur-RUK? Dunno who the Gelflings are – probably those of us who'd like to see a better solution than exits-all-round! Apologies to the late lamented Jim Henson, et al...

One thing the EU made clear:- Skeksies = Scexit.

From the pen (or WP) of an EU vice-president, a letter to the SG (which oor Alex kept quiet about, as it didn't fit his agenda):
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_Eu ... 4__pdf.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

oops - the URL screws up the page layout!

[thatchersorphan]

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; wednesday20th 2 of 4 police federation 42 mins in is Mays speech (I skipped to it, but caught the very last of speech before her, I think shes still not very popular with the police.

[citizenJA]

So, Grexit, Brexit, um, Scexit? Those for Scottish independence = 'Skeksies' and those for EU exit = ur-RUK? Dunno who the Gelflings are – probably those of us who'd like to see a better solution than exits-all-round! Apologies to the late lamented Jim Henson, et al...

One thing the EU made clear:- Skeksies = Scexit.

From the pen (or WP) of an EU vice-president, a letter to the SG (which oor Alex kept quiet about, as it didn't fit his agenda):

Whoa.
Great letter, Eric_WLothian.
If a territory of an EU Member State becomes independent, that territory is no longer in the EU.
By all means apply to be in the EU, independent territory.
Please remember any membership "...agreement is subject to ratification by all Member States and the applicant state."

edited to remove a lengthy weblink

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_Eu ... 4__pdf.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TechnicalEphemera]

A note attached to my post addressed to Ashcroft & his omniously pointing out UKIP's second places - I don't underestimate the danger of UKIP. They're not a left wing party & if people are voting for them thinking they are, they've made a mistake. Millions of people voted for UKIP in the GE 2015 - I take that seriously. I don't like how Ashcroft uses his power, resources & influence. That's my opinion. It's an aside, really, so what? I don't trust Ashcroft or his motives. It doesn't mean I think everything he says or writes is wrong.

The tweet RR2 posted up the thread from Faisal Islam contains a valuable link to the GE 2015 election results. I've not finished reading & absorbing it all yet.

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ ... fullreport" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If UKIP think they can pose as a left wing party they have lost the plot. They are second in all those Labour seats because the Tory vote has collapsed. They are very unlikely to challenge, Labour's big problem is how to squeeze UKIP in the marginals.

[LadyCentauria]

So, Grexit, Brexit, um, Scexit? Those for Scottish independence = 'Skeksies' and those for EU exit = ur-RUK? Dunno who the Gelflings are – probably those of us who'd like to see a better solution than exits-all-round! Apologies to the late lamented Jim Henson, et al...

One thing the EU made clear:- Skeksies = Scexit.

From the pen (or WP) of an EU vice-president, a letter to the SG (which oor Alex kept quiet about, as it didn't fit his agenda):
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_Eu ... 4__pdf.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

oops - the URL screws up the page layout!

Thanks, Eric, for another piece of the pie I'd missed somewhere along the line. Same advice on numerous occasions since 2004. Do they think they're suddenly going to get a new answer? Perhaps there's an area where the treaties could do with some amendment: a new state arising within the existing EU area to retain ties to the EU barring independence referendum answering yes to the question: Yes to Independence from ___ and Yes to retaining EU membership. It'd mean more questions on a referendum ballot paper though: Yes Yes, Yes No, No Yes, and I'm not sure how No No would work. Hmm.

[citizenJA]

A note attached to my post addressed to Ashcroft & his omniously pointing out UKIP's second places - I don't underestimate the danger of UKIP. They're not a left wing party & if people are voting for them thinking they are, they've made a mistake. Millions of people voted for UKIP in the GE 2015 - I take that seriously. I don't like how Ashcroft uses his power, resources & influence. That's my opinion. It's an aside, really, so what? I don't trust Ashcroft or his motives. It doesn't mean I think everything he says or writes is wrong.

The tweet RR2 posted up the thread from Faisal Islam contains a valuable link to the GE 2015 election results. I've not finished reading & absorbing it all yet.

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ ... fullreport" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If UKIP think they can pose as a left wing party they have lost the plot. They are second in all those Labour seats because the Tory vote has collapsed. They are very unlikely to challenge, Labour's big problem is how to squeeze UKIP in the marginals.

Edited to clarify I agree with you; UKIP aren't a left-wing party & aren't interested in regular people.
UKIP came second in a lot of Tory seats.

http://election.pressassociation.com/Re ... php#header" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I went through the list of 650 constituencies this morning linked above.

[Eric_WLothian]

So, Grexit, Brexit, um, Scexit? Those for Scottish independence = 'Skeksies' and those for EU exit = ur-RUK? Dunno who the Gelflings are – probably those of us who'd like to see a better solution than exits-all-round! Apologies to the late lamented Jim Henson, et al...

One thing the EU made clear:- Skeksies = Scexit.

From the pen (or WP) of an EU vice-president, a letter to the SG (which oor Alex kept quiet about, as it didn't fit his agenda):
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_Eu ... 4__pdf.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

oops - the URL screws up the page layout!

Thanks, Eric, for another piece of the pie I'd missed somewhere along the line. Same advice on numerous occasions since 2004. Do they think they're suddenly going to get a new answer? Perhaps there's an area where the treaties could do with some amendment: a new state arising within the existing EU area to retain ties to the EU barring independence referendum answering yes to the question: Yes to Independence from ___ and Yes to retaining EU membership. It'd mean more questions on a referendum ballot paper though: Yes Yes, Yes No, No Yes, and I'm not sure how No No would work. Hmm.

Too many EU countries have separatist movements for them to agree automatic entry of break-away states. (France/Basque; Spain/Catalonia; Belgium/Flemish/Walloon; Germany/Bavaria; Italy/Sardinia/Venice spring to mind).

[citizenJA]

I beg your pardon for tediously posting the same comment here as I've just done below the line on the G.
I'm so angry I'm shaking.

Banks hit by record fine for rigging forex markets
Barclays, RBS, Citi, JP Morgan and UBS forced to pay out over collusion by traders in several countries in another big blow to their reputations
Announcing the fines, Loretta Lynch, the US attorney general, said bank traders had exhibited “breathtaking flagrancy” in setting up a group they called “the cartel” to manipulate the market between 2007 and the end of 2013.

“The penalty these banks will now pay is fitting considering the long-running and egregious nature of their anticompetitive conduct. It is commensurate with the pervasive harm done. And it should deter competitors in the future from chasing profits without regard to fairness, to the law, or to the public welfare,” she said.

But it's not though.
Illegal banking activity broke the economies regular people have to use. How many jobs lost? How many lives fractured because of this crime? How much was turned over to the UK Chancellor?

Barclays was fined £1.5bn by five regulators, including a record £284m by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority. The FCA will hand its fine to the chancellor, George Osborne. Yet Barclays’ stock market value rose by £1.5bn as a result of a 3% rise in its share price amid relief the fine was not even larger. RBS’s shares also rose 1.8%. The increases came even though the regulators said there could be more fines to come.

This isn't justice.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... t-52501465" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[citizenJA]

Manipulation of commodities markets on the scale admitted to by these criminals aren't being adequately punished for their crimes. I understand this activity is one of many criminal frauds perpetrated on us all. Their fraudulent activities affect everyone reliant on the economic system they're playing with. These are a few people with too much control over an unaccountable realm recently taking economies to the brink of total failure - collapse. Nothing meaningful has changed since 2008.

[citizenJA]

Chris Leslie MP, Labour’s Shadow Chancellor, responding to the further fines for banks engaged in foreign exchange market manipulation, said:

"Surely the time has come for fundamental reform and tougher penalties for banking misconduct.
If ever there was an example of appalling collusion between bankers putting their own interests ahead of customers, then this is it.
Ministers refused to act in 2012 when we pressed for broader regulation of financial benchmarks such as those in foreign exchange.

We now find out this activity was going on as recently as last year.
We need to rebuild the reputation of British banking, which plays such a crucial role in our economy.”

MAY 20, 2015 (5:26 PM)
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1194504 ... s-come-for" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(my bold)

[citizenJA]

...the chancellor said: “It is now within our grasp to make Britain the most prosperous country in the world and the best place to do business.

“It would be very easy at the beginning of a second term to take our foot off the pedal. That’s not what we’re going to do. I want Britain to find that extra gear.”

The chancellor announced the creation of a new government-owned company, UK Government Investments (UKGI), as part of the government’s plan to reduce the national debt by selling of more than £23bn of publicly-owned corporate and financial assets in 2015-16. UKGI will bring together the two bodies that manage the taxpayer stake in businesses – the Shareholder Executive and UK Financial Instruments – into one holding company.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... ge-osborne" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regular people are in some pretty shit.

[rebeccariots2]

This New Labour revival could end with a party split
Seumas Milne
This leadership contest is being led by a Blairite agenda. But the debate demands the voice of the left
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ur-breakup" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

At last someone is saying something that makes sense to me.

So all Labour’s leadership candidates have decided that the reason the party lost was its support for modest increases in taxes on the wealthy and steps to rein in untrammelled corporate power. But what evidence is there that these policies sank Labour’s campaign? None whatsoever. In fact the mansion tax, 50% top tax rate and privatised energy price freeze were among Labour’s most popular policies. And polling has regularly found large majorities want the government to be “tougher on big business” – as well as an end to austerity.

Labour’s leadership campaign has been led by a Blairite agenda which doesn’t reflect public, let alone Labour, opinion
Turning their backs on tax justice and retreating to the fateful corporate embrace of the Blair years not only puts Labour’s leaders on the wrong side of public opinion and outrage at rising inequality. It even puts them firmly to the right of the prime minister’s former adviser Steve Hilton, who has this week been calling for action against corrupt corporate and elite power.

... But without a candidate prepared to challenge the lurch to the right, the terms of Labour’s debate will be set by the media and Blair revivalists, and the pressure on the frontrunners will be one-way traffic.

The 35-MP nomination hurdle was set to prevent such unwelcome interventions, and one possible candidate, the former miners’ leader Ian Lavery, has ruled himself out because of the threat of media harassment of his family. But Diane Abbott, who stood five years ago, and the shadow cabinet member John Trickett, among others, are ready to stand – and shift the focus of the debate.

One way or another, the wider Labour party needs to take back control of its own contest. If the politics currently paraded by the main candidates wins out, Labour’s prospects in a country where hostility to the Westminster elite has already redrawn the electoral map look bleak. ...

[LadyCentauria]

...the chancellor said: “It is now within our grasp to make Britain the most prosperous country in the world and the best place to do business.

“It would be very easy at the beginning of a second term to take our foot off the pedal. That’s not what we’re going to do. I want Britain to find that extra gear.”

The chancellor announced the creation of a new government-owned company, UK Government Investments (UKGI), as part of the government’s plan to reduce the national debt by selling of more than £23bn of publicly-owned corporate and financial assets in 2015-16. UKGI will bring together the two bodies that manage the taxpayer stake in businesses – the Shareholder Executive and UK Financial Instruments – into one holding company.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... ge-osborne" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regular people are in some pretty shit.

Britain’s productivity has stagnated since the country went into its deepest postwar recession in 2008, with output per head 15% below where it would have been had the pre-crisis trend continued and about 30% lower than in rival countries such as the US, Germany and France.

Osborne said nobody knew why Britain’s record had been so poor but said he would rather “have the productivity challenge than the challenge of mass unemployment”.

Really, Mr. Osborne? Nobody knew why the record's been so poor? I'm sure if you bothered asking around there'd be quite a few who could make their suggestions. And it might have a fair bit to do with your decisions in Government being not quite exactly sensible. And, by the way, you've got the productivity challenge and the challenge not only of mass unemployment but also of mass underemployment. You could have saved more than a few jobs in steel by investment, then there were all those civil service jobs and a fair few other jobs and contracts that didn't need outsourced, and investment in a schools-rebuilding and repairs programme that should have been continued, and, and, and...

[citizenJA]

Thank you, everyone for your posts today.
love
cJA

[LadyCentauria]

And you, @cJA

[LadyCentauria]

Neil Findlay's contribution in the Scottish Economy Debate I referred to earlier (from 15.57hrs):
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parli ... ScotParlOR

We should go back to the European Union and ask a different question on procurement and the living wage. I suggest that we ask how we can use public procurement to extend coverage of the living wage. We should look at how the Government pays out grants through regional selective assistance and other subsidies. Money that goes to charities, agencies and all the rest should have criteria and conditions relating to pay and conditions attached as part of the grant-awarding process. We should ensure that inward investors such as Amazon, which we paid £10 million to locate in Fife, pay fair wages and offer decent conditions, as part of the grant award. We should look at the small business bonus scheme and have a different rates for businesses that pay the living wage and meet other fair employment criteria. We should urge organisations in the charitable and social enterprise sector to lead the way as exemplars in their employment practices. I know that many do that, but not all of them do.

With the will, we can bring all the parties together to tackle the matter head on, co-operatively alongside trade unions and civic society—or we can sit back, point the finger and say that it is not our fault. I hope that the Government will set aside its previous approach and move on, thereby showing that this Parliament can put aside political differences to act quickly. I am up for that; I wonder whether the Government is.

[LadyCentauria]

Just caught up on this in the race to become Labour's London Mayoral Candidate. From an article on Gareth Thomas MP, who has put himself forward:

A mayoral housing company would be formed by a future Mayor Thomas to “champion social housing”, encompassing Transport for London’s (TfL) considerable land assets for which, at present, it has its own, rather different plans. He says he’d use mayoral planning powers to impose more stringent demands on property developers to deliver affordable homes, and he’s championed housing associations being allowed to borrow money from local people to fund the building of low cost homes in their areas.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/dav ... yoral-race

He's a Labour Co-operative member and has stood down from his Shadow Cabinet posts (London group plus Africa and the Middle East) to concentrate on his constituency and his campaign for selection for the Mayoral Election.