Bank Holiday Monday 25th May

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Mon 25 May, 2015 8:52 am

I've never started the daily thread on here. I feel like a toddler that's got up before their parents. Hope I haven't made too much of a mess before all the grown ups get up. Morning all.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 25 May, 2015 9:00 am

Looks good to me Tizme. This article makes an important point re instant analysis of what happened.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/m ... ction-2015

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:04 am

Forgot today was a bank holiday - maybe this thread should be added to the weekend one?

(sorry Tizme

)

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:08 am

Morning all.

This won't end well...

Town hall leaders want to be able to tackle failing academies

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/mai ... -1-7276764

COUNCILS are calling for powers to be able to intervene at academies or free schools at “the first sign of a problem.”

The Local Government Association has called for an end to a situation “where town halls are held responsible for the decision of highly paid head teachers” but cannot hold these people to account if failings occur at their schools.

but at the same time...

The next Queen’s speech is expected to include plans to allow the Government to turn coasting schools - those found to require improvement by Ofsted and missing Government targets - into academies.

So....following Wilshaw and Laws, the LGA wants the power to intervene in free schools and academies, while the government wants the opposite - Regional Commissioners to be able to intervene in schools maintained by local authorities.

8 regional Commissioners isn't nearly enough to be able to cope with the existing number of academies let alone expect them to be able to cope with the rest that aren't anything to do with them.

I'm waiting for Manchester to tell the new Northern Powerhouse minister that they want schools under their control...which will be interesting since the new minister Jim O'Neill was on the Board of the DfE when so many were removed from the council in the first place!

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:15 am

frightful_oik wrote:Looks good to me Tizme. This article makes an important point re instant analysis of what happened.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/m ... ction-2015

Yep. I'm rather irritated by all the instant analysis myself. Also, the lack of support for Ed both before and since the election within his own party.

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:17 am

Commons Serjeant at Arms Lawrence Ward walked out amid MPs’ fears there is a “spy in their midst” it has been reported
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/on ... ls-5757528" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

....Moscow agents seeking evidence of weaknesses such as money, sex or alcohol and targeting those MPs by blackmail.”

Even a low grade Russian spy should have no problem then...

Good morning.

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:18 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Forgot today was a bank holiday - maybe this thread should be added to the weekend one?

(sorry Tizme )

I'll have a full scale tantrum. Just saying............

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:21 am

Tizme1 wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Looks good to me Tizme. This article makes an important point re instant analysis of what happened.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/m ... ction-2015
Yep. I'm rather irritated by all the instant analysis myself. Also, the lack of support for Ed both before and since the election within his own party.

The king is dead - let's kick the shit out of him.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:37 am

Swarthlander wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Looks good to me Tizme. This article makes an important point re instant analysis of what happened.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/m ... ction-2015
Yep. I'm rather irritated by all the instant analysis myself. Also, the lack of support for Ed both before and since the election within his own party.
The king is dead - let's kick the shit out of him.

It was weird to read, in the very few comments then BTL that Ed was unelectable because he was too far left, too far right and nothing at all. It's a weird feeling, as if he has vanished as though he never was there, a chimera called hope that we all believed in. Still he is an elected MP who will presumably take his place in the commons. I'm still smarting about the poor choices open to us, I find them all unconvincing. Thatchersorphan posted a link late last night that offers an interesting perspective on Umunnas withdrawal. Among rather a lot of other things.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:41 am

Swarthlander wrote:Commons Serjeant at Arms Lawrence Ward walked out amid MPs’ fears there is a “spy in their midst” it has been reported
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/on ... ls-5757528" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
....Moscow agents seeking evidence of weaknesses such as money, sex or alcohol and targeting those MPs by blackmail.”
Even a low grade Russian spy should have no problem then...

Good morning.

Somehow I doubt it's Russians in their midst, sounds like more of the same old poop.

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:42 am

Swarthlander wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:
frightful_oik wrote:Looks good to me Tizme. This article makes an important point re instant analysis of what happened.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/m ... ction-2015
Yep. I'm rather irritated by all the instant analysis myself. Also, the lack of support for Ed both before and since the election within his own party.
The king is dead - let's kick the shit out of him.

We keep hearing about what Ed did wrong. I'd like to see someone write an article about what Ed did right. I also think the individual candidates have to take some responsibility. The Labour candidate here was woeful. And this was or should have been, a winnable seat for Labour.

Swarthlander · Post by **Swarthlander** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:45 am

EU referrendum...

I do hope the Labour Party, if they have to support the referrendum, can support the Yes campaign without becoming a Tory scapegoat. At least make the Tories front and centre on any Yes campaign stage.
The Scottish Independence campaign did Labour no favours at all and the Tories stood back and used them (us) as useful idiots.

There is a danger, that if (hopefully) the result is a 'Stay in' vote, the right-wing will blame it on Labour et al, working it that the left-wing has denied the people their desire.

Edit: I managed to confuse myself.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 25 May, 2015 10:48 am

I really think and hope Labour has learned the lessons of the Scottish referendum. If they haven't......well.....then maybe the party really is doomed

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:05 am

Coulson trial continues today - not a public holiday in Scotland.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:05 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I really think and hope Labour has learned the lessons of the Scottish referendum. If they haven't......well.....then maybe the party really is doomed

They should know now, not to touch anything the Tories are involved in with a barge pole.
The LibDems were chewed up and spit out.
We lost the election via Scotland because of the Cons perfidy after the Indy Ref.
I'm waiting to see what they do to the SNP.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:20 am

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I really think and hope Labour has learned the lessons of the Scottish referendum. If they haven't......well.....then maybe the party really is doomed

Where as its OK for the SNP....

Alex Salmond: I'll campaign with Tories to stay in EU
The former First Minister is accused of "staggering" hypocrisy after vilifying Labour for campaigning with the Conservatives during the independence referendum.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... in-EU.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:43 am

EU referendum voting rights will not be extended to all UK citizens living abroad

Despite Grant Shapps’ promise last year, the government rules out giving voting rights to British nationals living overseas for 15 years or more

This means that more than 1 million EU citizens living in Britain will not be able to vote, as they are in local elections, in what would be seen as a victory for Eurosceptic campaigners. The bill will also rule out giving the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds, an idea backed by Labour and the SNP. (Guardian)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ens-abroad

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:48 am

Joseph Stiglitz interview: Nobel-prize winning economist on advising Scotland on its future
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 73492.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Forget the headline - it bears very little relation to the article which contains almost nothing on advising Scotland ... for which I'm grateful. It's much more about growing inequality in the States and Europe and the need for policies that address that.

Perhaps someone could get Labour bods to think about this sentence when considering a vision for our country.

“This is not about the politics of envy, it is about the economics of trying to create a shared prosperity.”

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:52 am

Tizme1 wrote:
Swarthlander wrote:
Tizme1 wrote: Yep. I'm rather irritated by all the instant analysis myself. Also, the lack of support for Ed both before and since the election within his own party.
The king is dead - let's kick the shit out of him.
We keep hearing about what Ed did wrong. I'd like to see someone write an article about what Ed did right. I also think the individual candidates have to take some responsibility. The Labour candidate here was woeful. And this was or should have been, a winnable seat for Labour.

Labour might have done better to stick with Claire Ward for another election, tbh.

The record of Labour "retreads" trying to win back their old seat this time wasn't great and she would very likely have lost, but surely not by nearly 10k

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:52 am

PorFavor wrote:
EU referendum voting rights will not be extended to all UK citizens living abroad

Despite Grant Shapps’ promise last year, the government rules out giving voting rights to British nationals living overseas for 15 years or more

This means that more than 1 million EU citizens living in Britain will not be able to vote, as they are in local elections, in what would be seen as a victory for Eurosceptic campaigners. The bill will also rule out giving the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds, an idea backed by Labour and the SNP. (Guardian)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ens-abroad

As someone pointed out on the radio earlier - these are two of the groups most affected by the result of the referendum. It's not reversible like a general election result ... young people will be living and dealing with the outcome in the future ... those UK citizens living abroad could have a very uncertain time and status.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 25 May, 2015 11:58 am

ohsocynical wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:I really think and hope Labour has learned the lessons of the Scottish referendum. If they haven't......well.....then maybe the party really is doomed

They should know now, not to touch anything the Tories are involved in with a barge pole.
The LibDems were chewed up and spit out.
We lost the election via Scotland because of the Cons perfidy after the Indy Ref.
I'm waiting to see what they do to the SNP.

(my bold)
Agreed.
Tories intentionally cultivated fear & acted in bad faith - they targeted the whole country in their response after the Scottish Referendum.

Good-morning, everyone, I'm happy to be here with you.
I'm catching up on news; I didn't read news for a couple of days while away visiting more family.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:02 pm

Argos, Homebase and Tesco exploit workers with contracts guaranteeing around THREE HOURS a week

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ar ... ar_twitter

Well I've boycotted Tesco for a long time. Never shopped in Argos because I hate that way of buying anything, so that leaves Homebase, which will have to go on my list.

I wondered if they were doing workfare or the like, because the young girls on the tills couldn't give a damn whether they serve you or not. I can't say I blame them.

It will be an inconvenience because they are the only DIY store we have in this area. I don't go in there much because I don't have the money to shop for bits and pieces for the house. The snag is they were the only place I could get my lawnmower blades.

Oh well. Onwards and upwards....

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:02 pm

Exclusive: Train stations could be hived off in plan to split up Network Rail
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 73898.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:18 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Exclusive: Train stations could be hived off in plan to split up Network Rail
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 73898.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From the article:

The private sector could end up managing 18 of the UK’s biggest train stations, including Birmingham New Street and Glasgow Central, under reforms being considered by ministers.

The Treasury is understood to be particularly keen on splitting up the Network Rail empire, which was in effect renationalised last year. The Independent has previously revealed that the Department for Transport is looking at forcing Network Rail to sell off its telecoms, such as providing wifi for passengers and transmitting signalling information to drivers.

Why was Network Rail 'effectively renationalised'?
How will the private sector managing train stations benefit?
I'd genuinely like to know the rationale behind this.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:23 pm

citizenJA wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
Exclusive: Train stations could be hived off in plan to split up Network Rail
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 73898.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
From the article:
The private sector could end up managing 18 of the UK’s biggest train stations, including Birmingham New Street and Glasgow Central, under reforms being considered by ministers.

The Treasury is understood to be particularly keen on splitting up the Network Rail empire, which was in effect renationalised last year. The Independent has previously revealed that the Department for Transport is looking at forcing Network Rail to sell off its telecoms, such as providing wifi for passengers and transmitting signalling information to drivers.
Why was Network Rail 'effectively renationalised'?
How will the private sector managing train stations benefit?
I'd genuinely like to know the rationale behind this.

It was another one of those articles I found rather confusing ... lack of clarity and detail - combined with seeming contradictions. I seem to be encountering these quite frequently now. Not sure if it's just down to my brain slowing up - or actual lack of clarity and detail and seeming contradictions.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:28 pm

Gerry ‏@Archangelolill 14 hrs14 hours ago

Thousand severely disabled people must set up a pension scheme for their carer and no one knows how it will be costed

http://paullewismoney.blogspot.com/2015 ... l?spref=tw

This one for Ephie?

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:36 pm

MPs positions on repeal of fox hunting - current Commons

http://www.powa.org.uk/id89.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Frank FIELD & Kate HOEY both pro hunting, no surprise there then.
Lots of "unknown" as well, Labour ones need targeting by the anti campaign.

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:46 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Tizme1 wrote:
Swarthlander wrote: The king is dead - let's kick the shit out of him.
We keep hearing about what Ed did wrong. I'd like to see someone write an article about what Ed did right. I also think the individual candidates have to take some responsibility. The Labour candidate here was woeful. And this was or should have been, a winnable seat for Labour.
Labour might have done better to stick with Claire Ward for another election, tbh.

The record of Labour "retreads" trying to win back their old seat this time wasn't great and she would very likely have lost, but surely not by nearly 10k

I think Claire is quite happy to be out of it tbh. There was a lot of bad feeling towards her in 2010 due to her having bought a second property in London despite us being less than 20 minutes from Euston by train. I had some sympathy for her position - I've caught the late night trains back from Euston frequently and I don't much like doing it on my own.

Richard Harrington has kept his nose clean with regards expenses. And he is a reasonable constituency MP. Whoever stood for Labour should have been getting involved for at least the last two years. Matt was selected in Feb 2013 but didn't really get involved with anything. He turned up briefly at a Farm Terrace fund raiser a couple of years ago. And last year at a public meeting about Palestine. It wasn't even Labour that called the meeting [it was TUSC]. Matt stood up, announced he was the Labour candidate for MP and added nothing to the discussion. Nor did he get involved in any further action on that, or anything else that I'm aware of. Other than the occasional bland statement. As a local councillor, if he'd been more active he could have counterbalanced Richard's incumbency advantage at least to some degree.

At the various hustings, Matt just droned on we will blah blah blah quoting fairly meaningless figures. And he never once come back with an argument when Richard, Dorothy and Nick attacked him on the 'Labour broke the economy' rubbish. Or on the Labour only put the top rate of tax up for one month. And so on. I could have defended Labour's record better than him despite being a Green!

Tizme1 · Post by **Tizme1** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:50 pm

*tut*

Sorry about double post. Don't know why/how that happened.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 25 May, 2015 12:54 pm

citizenJA wrote: Why was Network Rail 'effectively renationalised'?

Something to do with this I think.

Classification of Network Rail under European System of Accounts 2010

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/na-classi ... -2010.html

This article explains the decision by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to classify Network Rail as a Central Government body in the UK National Accounts and Public Sector Finances. This results from new guidance in the 2010 European System of Accounts (ESA10).

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 1:31 pm

David Blanchflower: We're now in deflation and sorry, but it's not good news

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 73900.html

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Mon 25 May, 2015 1:32 pm

Am having a minor OCDesque issue about today's thread not being linked to the weekend one. My fault - didn't remember it was a bank holiday when I started the weekend thread on Saturday. Apologies for the oversight.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 1:38 pm

The weather isn't too bad. Cloudy, but warm. I did some baking this morning, and Mr Ohso and I thought we'd go and sit by the local lake for a bit just to get us out of the house. It's too far to walk, Mr Ohso needs a cartilage operation, so we took the car.

Blimey. There is a MacDonalds by the lakeside. Cars were queuing out onto the road, and when we finally got past them the car park was chock full.
There is also a workmans cafe where they do ice creams and a decent cup of tea. They were shut.

So we came home

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Mon 25 May, 2015 1:46 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:Am having a minor OCDesque issue about today's thread not being linked to the weekend one. My fault - didn't remember it was a bank holiday when I started the weekend thread on Saturday. Apologies for the oversight.

Me, I quite like a new thread of a Mundee.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 25 May, 2015 1:49 pm

Is it just me or does this site throw a wobbly when I press reload?

It's like the whole of your life flashing before your eyes...

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 1:58 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Is it just me or does this site throw a wobbly when I press reload?

It's like the whole of your life flashing before your eyes...

It seems to be behaving itself for me....

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 25 May, 2015 2:07 pm

Tizme1 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Tizme1 wrote: We keep hearing about what Ed did wrong. I'd like to see someone write an article about what Ed did right. I also think the individual candidates have to take some responsibility. The Labour candidate here was woeful. And this was or should have been, a winnable seat for Labour.
Labour might have done better to stick with Claire Ward for another election, tbh.

The record of Labour "retreads" trying to win back their old seat this time wasn't great and she would very likely have lost, but surely not by nearly 10k
I think Claire is quite happy to be out of it tbh. There was a lot of bad feeling towards her in 2010 due to her having bought a second property in London despite us being less than 20 minutes from Euston by train. I had some sympathy for her position - I've caught the late night trains back from Euston frequently and I don't much like doing it on my own.

Yes, its easy to forget how poisonous things were in the aftermath of the expenses revelations - the main offenders having the book thrown at them is totally right and proper, but many whose transgressions were actually trivial or even non-existent also got dragged through the mud.

Had forgotten earlier about Claire's parents going over to UKIP, actually - might have been interesting to hear her take on that one

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 2:10 pm

From 2014. I missed this.

Over the last three years the BBC has secretly obtained millions of pounds in grants from the European Union. Licence fee payers might assume that the Corporation would have been compelled to disclose the source of this money in its annual reports, but they bear no trace of it specifically. In the latest set of accounts, for example, these funds are simply referred to as ‘other grant income’.

Instead of making an open declaration, the BBC’s successful lobbying for this money had to be prised out of it using a Freedom of Information (FoI) request lodged for The Spectator, proving that there was never any danger of the state broadcaster’s bosses volunteering it willingly.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/culturehou ... d-to-hide/

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 25 May, 2015 2:14 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
citizenJA wrote: Why was Network Rail 'effectively renationalised'?
Something to do with this I think.
Classification of Network Rail under European System of Accounts 2010

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/na-classi ... -2010.html

This article explains the decision by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to classify Network Rail as a Central Government body in the UK National Accounts and Public Sector Finances. This results from new guidance in the 2010 European System of Accounts (ESA10).

All that changed was acknowledgement of reality.
Network Rail was labelled a private sector endeavour with many privileges such a venture enjoys without being obliged to shoulder burdens we would expect private businesses to cover.
Not so much 'renationalised' as recognising UK government (taxpayers) are totally responsible for Network Rail's debts, UK government (taxpayers) alone are burdened with the financial risk, & should Network Rail fail to provide service, UK government (taxpayers) are obliged to provide rail service.
Posted below relevant explanation from the Office for National Statistics (ONS):

This notion of control is also applicable to Non-Profit Institions (NPI) and similarly covers the ability to determine the general policy or programme of the NPI.
2010 European System of Accounts (ESA10) 20.15 indicates that the following five criteria should be considered:
a) appointment of officers, b) other provisions of the enabling instrument (such as the specific obligations in the statute of the NPI), c) contractual agreements, d) degree of financing and e) risk exposure.

In some cases, one indicator can be sufficient to establish control but it is most frequently necessary to consider collectively a number of indicators and would be frequently 'judgmental in nature' (2013 MGDD I.2.3 (12).

In relation to the degree of government’s risk exposure, ONS has concluded that this factor is highly relevant for three reasons;

- Network Rail’s debt is guaranteed explicitly by Department of Transportation (DfT). Both DfT and HM Treasury have confirmed to ONS that they are guaranteeing this debt

- There is a statutory obligation on government to protect the interests of rail users, meaning government would be forced to step in to keep the railways operating were Network Rail to collapse

- Nobody else bears any significant financial risk in relation to Network Rail (as Network Rail has no shareholders)

ONS concluded that these facts establish control by government and therefore Network Rail should be classified in the public sector.

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/na-classi ... twork-Rail" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(my bold)
How would selling rail infrastructure to private businesses change the fact all debt, financial risk or transfer of the compulsion to provide rail service would continue to be the responsibility of UK government (taxpayers)?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 25 May, 2015 2:53 pm

If I've misunderstood what I've read & posted an inaccurate assessment regarding Network Rail, the ONS, Tory government & plans to allow private businesses to run train stations please don't hesitate to let me know.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 25 May, 2015 2:57 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Is it just me or does this site throw a wobbly when I press reload?

It's like the whole of your life flashing before your eyes...

Yep, it's doing that for me too today.
Rapid flashing of posts when hitting reload.
It's disorientating; sometimes I don't come upon a post until hours later.
Please excuse me if I've missed a post, everyone. I'm not ignoring anyone. Apologies.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 3:46 pm

citizenJA wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:Is it just me or does this site throw a wobbly when I press reload?

It's like the whole of your life flashing before your eyes...
Yep, it's doing that for me too today.
Rapid flashing of posts when hitting reload.
It's disorientating; sometimes I don't come upon a post until hours later.
Please excuse me if I've missed a post, everyone. I'm not ignoring anyone. Apologies.

It's doing it on my computer now.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Mon 25 May, 2015 4:03 pm

It has also emerged that Network Rail paid bonuses totalling nearly £60m for the year to 30 March to 35,000 staff.

That's £171.43 each - though distribution of bonuses probably don't get divvied up like that.
Was I supposed to become indignant over the reported amounts staff receive in bonuses?
I didn't.
Just sad.

This year’s bonus pot is expected to be lower as more performance targets have been missed.

Bonuses probably aren't appropriate motivators in this industry, I could be wrong.
Better pay, greater organisational stability & employment conditions is probably best for everyone involved.
The most powerful & well-paid, public or private, will benefit from a nice civilisation fairly organised.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 73898.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 4:11 pm

4 charts that show exactly what Britain's 3m minority ethnic voters think of the political parties – and it is not good news for Labour

The political persuasions of the three million minority ethnic voters in Britain has been revealed – and it isn't good news for the Labour party.

A report by think tank British Future shows that 33 per cent of black, Asian and ethnic minority ethnic (BAME) voters supported the Conservatives in the last general election, a new record for the party which has struggled to appeal to BAME voters in the past.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 74051.html

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 4:23 pm

Lord Prescott ridicules Labour leader candidates' use of the word 'aspiration'
New Labour grandee hits out at generic phrases used by leadership hopefuls, saying: 'What the hell does that mean, 'aspiration'?'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... ation.html

Not only us that word grated on then.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Mon 25 May, 2015 4:53 pm

It means "Ed was a nasty wasty who didn't grovel to the super rich" - at least when used by Blairites, anyway

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 4:54 pm

EU referendum voting rights will not be extended to all UK citizens living abroad
Despite Grant Shapps’ promise last year, the government rules out giving voting rights to British nationals living overseas for 15 years or more

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... are_btn_tw

1st u-turn of the new term?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 6:18 pm

As it's the Daily Mirror I won't moan too much, but honestly. I hate bloody articles like this.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/recipes-c ... es-5760390

Eat on a fiver for 5 days.

If you're relying on food banks or very little money to feed yourself, you're going to have a job keeping a decent store cupboard of spices etc.

She didn't have enough money to buy oil.

Doubtful if you can afford to keep a freezer running and it's certainly not sensible if you've little to put in it so that rules out the frozen vegetables she is using.

And grinding oats? Only if you're lucky enough to have a food processor.

And dammit. She also used a computer to see which shops had the best bargains and bought from them. If you're that hard up, you can't afford bus fares, let alone own a car, so you have to use the nearest supermarket. And I'd have sold or hocked the computer to buy extra food a long time ago....

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Mon 25 May, 2015 6:42 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
EU referendum voting rights will not be extended to all UK citizens living abroad
Despite Grant Shapps’ promise last year, the government rules out giving voting rights to British nationals living overseas for 15 years or more

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... are_btn_tw
1st u-turn of the new term?

Worse than that - it was actually in the manifesto.

We will complete the electoral register, by working to include more of the five million Britons who live abroad. We will introduce votes for life, scrapping the rule that bars British citizens who have lived abroad for more than 15 years from voting.

I looked this up when swatting away a silly troll that tried to say that it was labour gerrymandering by introducing the 15 year rule.

Thatcher brought expat voting for anyone living abroad for up to 15 years back in 1985.
Increased it to 20 years in 1989
Labour reduced it to 15 in 2000

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Mon 25 May, 2015 6:48 pm

MagsNews ‏@MagsNews 44 mins44 minutes ago

Living standards are in decline across society. But shame prevents the well-off from showing solidarity Zoe Williams

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -standards

Wait til they can't afford to feel shame.

Then listen to the complaints.