Thursday 2nd July 2015

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:05 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Off to fetch the dog.

I will not let my emotions show. I will not let my emotions show. I will not let my emotions ....

He'll be glad to see you....

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:07 pm

@Roger or Tubby
Has there been a move back to separating SEN children, or have separate schools continued all along ?

https://twitter.com/SwissCottageSch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://swisscottage.camden.sch.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:10 pm

SNP fury as government announces English votes for English laws
Chris Grayling, the leader of the Commons, says English MPs will have their voice recognised for the first time but the SNP condemns his plans as 'unworkable garbage

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... -laws.html

What did SNP think was going to happen?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:12 pm

I'm assuming that it is not a coincidence given the current debate on ISIS (so sue me, Dave...) that Douglas Murray is on QT tonight?

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:19 pm

I have now read the BBC article several times, and have decided to post my thoughts now that my temper has cooled. A little.

Having predicted (for some time) that the WRAG would go, I'm not pleased to be (possibly) correct. Of course, with the enhanced rate going we can expect other WRAG-specific things to go with it - including the insistence on attendance at 6 work-focused interviews subject to sanction going and being replaced by regular signing-on.....and, in time, no difference between claiming benefits in the same amounts for two different reasons.

The BBC has compared oranges with apples by citing the over-25 rates of WRAG and SG with the 18-24 rate for JSA - and neglecting to mention altogether the fact that nearly a million ESA claimants get the same rate as JSA claimants while they wait for their first assessment, and an assessment to boot that 800,000 of them will not have because they go back to work and were only ever claiming temporarily.
The BBC has also stated that 2 million people get ESA, and more of them are doing so as time goes on; failing to report that this is inevitable due to the migration from IB to ESA. There are 2.5 million people on one or other of these sickness benefits - the number on ESA will rise as IB falls.
This is an appalling report and is devoid of balance. IB + ESA cost £12BN in 2010; IB + ESA cost £13BN last year. It will cost £13BN this year.

What is particularly galling is not just the BBC's stupidity (or deliberate obfuscation) but also the failure to challenge some of the sillier remarks from the "leaked" report. Like - "removing the £30 ..... would give people less reason to worry about the outcome of their assessment". This could only be true in the respect that they would know in advance that they will not get any more than they're already getting. No worries there, then.

As usual, a spokesthing from the think-tank responsible opines that there is a "huge gap between disabled persons' employment rate and non-disabled persons' employment rate" - well fuck my old boots! Is there really? Shocked, I am.
Never mind that this has absolutely bugger all to do with disability but illness - just because Tory, Labour, and most other MPs don't understand the difference, that's no excuse for people apparently "researching" the subject not to get it straight.

The article finishes with a little mention of changes to the Support Group as well - possibly to be announced in the Budget. Cue more dying people being sent to workfare, new sanctions on the seriously ill, and cuts in allowances unless mad people comply with dangerous NLP, CBT, whatever.

Having been without my due benefits for some time now - more than 6 months - I am no closer to getting the problem sorted out.
The head honcho at DWP in London has yet to respond to my (now escalated-many-times) complaint, and I am owed a lot of money. I am sick of having to rely on other people and I am a gnats' dick away from abandoning any claim altogether.
This, obviously, is what these bastards count on - make things impossible for so long that people simply give up and go away.

Some of them go away forever.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:19 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:@Roger or Tubby
Has there been a move back to separating SEN children, or have separate schools continued all along ?

https://twitter.com/SwissCottageSch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://swisscottage.camden.sch.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This one looks like it's been around for a long while. There are schools around that deal with the most severe need but most SEN children are accommodated within the normal system. Not aware of any concerted campaign to separate any more than is now.

I'm now the link governor responsible for SEN and was in only this week with our very experienced SENCo - the school has the support for each child mapped out very well and this is reviewed on a regular basis.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:27 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:@Roger or Tubby
Has there been a move back to separating SEN children, or have separate schools continued all along ?

https://twitter.com/SwissCottageSch" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://swisscottage.camden.sch.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This one looks like it's been around for a long while. There are schools around that deal with the most severe need but most SEN children are accommodated within the normal system. Not aware of any concerted campaign to separate any more than is now.

I'm now the link governor responsible for SEN and was in only this week with our very experienced SENCo - the school has the support for each child mapped out very well and this is reviewed on a regular basis.

Yes, our local school has a first rate SEN department so much so that - with the new lifetime statements giving more choice - they are getting quite a few requests from outside the area.
I hope they are not going back to separation..

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:29 pm

Good-afternoon, friends.

AngryAsWell, I didn't watch the Labour hustings & I'm unable to give you my opinion.

I appreciate everyone's contributions regarding poor Wimbledon coverage. I don't often watch sport or follow it, however, I was a tennis player when I was ten years old. I showed some promise. I liked to read books more than I liked to play tennis. I don't play now. It's gripping, watching good tennis played. I'm sorry the coverage was disappointing. Sounds crap.

I've been a student all my life.
I've recognised strong feelings inside myself after comprehending injustice in one form or another & I lose sight of the whole.
I've pulled back & noted, "This is how war starts".
It's possible to acknowledge injustice & work non-violently to help correct it without abuse or pain.
I choose this way to resolve conflict.
I ask everyone in the world to use non-violence to resolve conflict.

Reading about our Greek friends & our friends from other EU partner nations, I read with horror an escalation of hostility by Greece's creditors undermining the effort of Greece's current government.
Greece's creditors are using intentionally detrimental economic policies in place putting regular people in tough spot.
It never had to be this way & it can stop now.

"This book is concerned with [folly], that is, the pursuit of policy contrary to the self-interest of the constituency or state involved.
- counter-productive in its own time, not merely in hindsight.
- feasible alternative course of action must have been available.
- policy in question should be that of a group, not an individual ruler, and should persist beyond ‘any one political lifetime."
from The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam
by Barbara W. Tuchman

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:44 pm

@Ephemerid
My dear friend, I love you.
xx
cJA

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 4:48 pm

IMF says Greece needs extra €50bn in funds and debt relief

The International Monetary Fund has electrified the referendum debate in Greece after it conceded that the crisis-ridden country needs €50bn (£35bn or $55bn) of extra funds over the next three years and large-scale debt relief to create “a breathing space” and stabilise the economy.

With three days to go before a knife-edge referendum, the IMF revealed a deep split with Europe as it warned that Greece’s debts were “unsustainable”.

Fund officials said they would not be prepared to put a proposal for a third Greek bailout package to the Washington-based organisation’s board unless it included both a commitment to economic reform and debt relief. According to the IMF, Greece should have a 20-year grace period before making any debt repayments and that final payments should not take place until 2055.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... 50bn-euros" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hey! Far out! Thank you.

edited to add - please read the entire article if you have the time or inclination

"The IMF said that is was releasing it preliminary draft debt sustainability analysis as a result of the leaks of documents reported in the Guardian earlier this week."

When a lot of regular people see the writing on the wall, the powers that be recognise, "We ain' gon' get away with stupid".

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 5:35 pm

I know, I know.
The struggles continue.
Especially in our patch of EU - the UK.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 5:51 pm

PorFavor wrote:Just a thought -
If the Isil thing is going to "last a generation" anyway, what will be gained by bombing Syria?

Absolutely nothing will be gained by bombing Syria.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 5:54 pm

Jeremy Hunt is an utter fuckwit.

All that water he imbibes for homeopathy is on his brain.
Correction - IS his brain.
A quack therapy, moreover, that is not good enough for his kids when their sniffles make him drag them off to A&E....
But I digress.

I am chronically sick and I take 8 medications regularly. They are very common treatments, with expired licences, and are thus prescribed in generic form. This is excellent, as the most expensive weighs in at 91 pence for a whole month's supply.
If I lived in England, my monthly prescription, currently costing the NHS less than a tenner (including inhalers, which I use rarely as my GP has a chronic disease management clinic and anyway they only cost £25 a year) would be £64 for the minimum.
The vast majority of prescriptions issued in the UK are for common medications, especially in older people, which cost very little but save lives - eg. statins, anti-hypotensives - and routine generic painkillers, anti-depressants, and anti-biotics.

Next year, when C(h)unt asks his SPAD how many of those prescriptions got his new NHS-taxpayer-funded label on for being more than £20, the answer will be....not a lot.

Expensive drugs are invariably the specialist drugs, usually sold under licence and thus with no generic alternative, which are prescribed for very serious and not very common conditions. Specialist anti-retro-virals for HIV/Heps, immuno-suppressive drugs for transplantation support, cancer treatments, new experimental drugs for Alzheimers, or specific medicines to extend the life of some cancer patients, are examples.

So the people who need to take very expensive medication in order to have a better quality of what's left of their lives - or indeed, have any life left to live at all - will get their survival neatly packaged with the price tag explaining that the taxpayer is paying for it, and how much.

The average cost of treating someone who is HIV positive is £18,000 a year - although this is falling as new drugs come of licence and generics can be bought; plus early diagnosis and intervention is improving outcomes all the time.
If I were diagnosed with HIV, which is still a difficult diagnosis to receive however skilfully delivered and however no-judgementally it is discussed, I would feel bad enough without getting a label on my drugs every month bearing "This NHS medicine cost £1,500 funded by the taxpayer"

This is a very nasty, pernicious idea. No surprise coming from one fascist among many others on the front bench.
What's the idea? People with HIV or Alzheimers or incurable cancer - are they supposed to feel guilt for the hand life has dealt them?
Are they supposed to say "Oh I won't bother with that extra 6 weeks with the medicine, it's a bit too dear, isn't it?"
Or maybe "I think I'll just progress to AIDs now I know how tough this is for the taxpayers out there"

Way to go, Jezza. Impose guilt trips on dying people. That'll help.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 5:58 pm

citizenJA wrote:Good-afternoon, friends.

AngryAsWell, I didn't watch the Labour hustings & I'm unable to give you my opinion.

I appreciate everyone's contributions regarding poor Wimbledon coverage. I don't often watch sport or follow it, however, I was a tennis player when I was ten years old. I showed some promise. I liked to read books more than I liked to play tennis. I don't play now. It's gripping, watching good tennis played. I'm sorry the coverage was disappointing. Sounds crap.

I've been a student all my life.
I've recognised strong feelings inside myself after comprehending injustice in one form or another & I lose sight of the whole.
I've pulled back & noted, "This is how war starts".
It's possible to acknowledge injustice & work non-violently to help correct it without abuse or pain.
I choose this way to resolve conflict.
I ask everyone in the world to use non-violence to resolve conflict.

Reading about our Greek friends & our friends from other EU partner nations, I read with horror an escalation of hostility by Greece's creditors undermining the effort of Greece's current government.
Greece's creditors are using intentionally detrimental economic policies in place putting regular people in tough spot.
It never had to be this way & it can stop now.
"This book is concerned with [folly], that is, the pursuit of policy contrary to the self-interest of the constituency or state involved.
- counter-productive in its own time, not merely in hindsight.
- feasible alternative course of action must have been available.
- policy in question should be that of a group, not an individual ruler, and should persist beyond ‘any one political lifetime."
from The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam
by Barbara W. Tuchman

With you on all points. This just might give us all some hope in humanity:

€1,472,992
raised by 85,271 people in 5 days

https://www.indiegogo.com/greek-bailout ... tml#/story
It is, admittedly, only a small fraction of the target (€1.6bn) but people are generous and five of those people, so far, have offered €5,000 each.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 6:36 pm

ephemerid wrote:Jeremy Hunt is an utter fuckwit.

All that water he imbibes for homeopathy is on his brain.
Correction - IS his brain.
A quack therapy, moreover, that is not good enough for his kids when their sniffles make him drag them off to A&E....
But I digress.

I am chronically sick and I take 8 medications regularly. They are very common treatments, with expired licences, and are thus prescribed in generic form. This is excellent, as the most expensive weighs in at 91 pence for a whole month's supply.
If I lived in England, my monthly prescription, currently costing the NHS less than a tenner (including inhalers, which I use rarely as my GP has a chronic disease management clinic and anyway they only cost £25 a year) would be £64 for the minimum.
The vast majority of prescriptions issued in the UK are for common medications, especially in older people, which cost very little but save lives - eg. statins, anti-hypotensives - and routine generic painkillers, anti-depressants, and anti-biotics.

Next year, when C(h)unt asks his SPAD how many of those prescriptions got his new NHS-taxpayer-funded label on for being more than £20, the answer will be....not a lot.

Expensive drugs are invariably the specialist drugs, usually sold under licence and thus with no generic alternative, which are prescribed for very serious and not very common conditions. Specialist anti-retro-virals for HIV/Heps, immuno-suppressive drugs for transplantation support, cancer treatments, new experimental drugs for Alzheimers, or specific medicines to extend the life of some cancer patients, are examples.

So the people who need to take very expensive medication in order to have a better quality of what's left of their lives - or indeed, have any life left to live at all - will get their survival neatly packaged with the price tag explaining that the taxpayer is paying for it, and how much.

The average cost of treating someone who is HIV positive is £18,000 a year - although this is falling as new drugs come of licence and generics can be bought; plus early diagnosis and intervention is improving outcomes all the time.
If I were diagnosed with HIV, which is still a difficult diagnosis to receive however skilfully delivered and however no-judgementally it is discussed, I would feel bad enough without getting a label on my drugs every month bearing "This NHS medicine cost £1,500 funded by the taxpayer"

This is a very nasty, pernicious idea. No surprise coming from one fascist among many others on the front bench.
What's the idea? People with HIV or Alzheimers or incurable cancer - are they supposed to feel guilt for the hand life has dealt them?
Are they supposed to say "Oh I won't bother with that extra 6 weeks with the medicine, it's a bit too dear, isn't it?"
Or maybe "I think I'll just progress to AIDs now I know how tough this is for the taxpayers out there"

Way to go, Jezza. Impose guilt trips on dying people. That'll help.

A while back, my MP Philip Lee who is also a doctor wanted patients to be given a print out of the costs each time we saw the doctor and had treatment.

God knows what diabolical ideas are shunted around when those nasty shits hang out together.

Edited because I was distracted by Mr Ohso... Put doctors when it should have been patients.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:13 pm

I am watching the divinely beautiful Dustin Brown engage in a war of attrition with the delightfully gorgeous force of nature that is Rafael Nadal.

I want Rafa to win - just because he fought so hard and for so long to overcome his various injuries. And he's a nice bloke off court.

Brown has done this before - and at Wimbledon too - and scared off a few big names only to flake out in his next game.

So I'm for lovely Rafa - especially if he keeps on with the death-ray stares at the line judge - but whatever happens I hope I don't miss anything delicious mid-swoon......then they can have those boys washed and brought to my tent.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:24 pm

Winky thing alert!

I don't think Jeremy Hunt is an idiot. I think his "£20 funded by the UK taxpayer" is very important.

We need to tell people what things are costing. But people who are sick don't need to feel ashamed at costing the taxpayer money. Add the explanation- "Because I have a health condition than none of you would want, believe you me".

The Davies Report on Heathrow. That should have had "£20 million funded by the taxpayer" on the front and at the top of the web page.

And the explanation "Because Cameron wanted some political cover for a U-turn".

Fair?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:25 pm

ephemerid wrote:I am watching the divinely beautiful Dustin Brown engage in a war of attrition with the delightfully gorgeous force of nature that is Rafael Nadal.

I want Rafa to win - just because he fought so hard and for so long to overcome his various injuries. And he's a nice bloke off court.

Brown has done this before - and at Wimbledon too - and scared off a few big names only to flake out in his next game.

So I'm for lovely Rafa - especially if he keeps on with the death-ray stares at the line judge - but whatever happens I hope I don't miss anything delicious mid-swoon......then they can have those boys washed and brought to my tent.

I'm watching too - an amazing match so far.

Brown has the advantage - if he holds his nerve..and his serve, he's got it.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:34 pm

Scintillating stuff Brown and Nadal.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:46 pm

Simply astonishing stuff.

Some of his returns were just stunning.

Fully deserved win.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:56 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
ephemerid wrote:Jeremy Hunt is an utter fuckwit.

All that water he imbibes for homeopathy is on his brain.
Correction - IS his brain.
A quack therapy, moreover, that is not good enough for his kids when their sniffles make him drag them off to A&E....
But I digress.

I am chronically sick and I take 8 medications regularly. They are very common treatments, with expired licences, and are thus prescribed in generic form. This is excellent, as the most expensive weighs in at 91 pence for a whole month's supply.
If I lived in England, my monthly prescription, currently costing the NHS less than a tenner (including inhalers, which I use rarely as my GP has a chronic disease management clinic and anyway they only cost £25 a year) would be £64 for the minimum.
The vast majority of prescriptions issued in the UK are for common medications, especially in older people, which cost very little but save lives - eg. statins, anti-hypotensives - and routine generic painkillers, anti-depressants, and anti-biotics.

Next year, when C(h)unt asks his SPAD how many of those prescriptions got his new NHS-taxpayer-funded label on for being more than £20, the answer will be....not a lot.

Expensive drugs are invariably the specialist drugs, usually sold under licence and thus with no generic alternative, which are prescribed for very serious and not very common conditions. Specialist anti-retro-virals for HIV/Heps, immuno-suppressive drugs for transplantation support, cancer treatments, new experimental drugs for Alzheimers, or specific medicines to extend the life of some cancer patients, are examples.

So the people who need to take very expensive medication in order to have a better quality of what's left of their lives - or indeed, have any life left to live at all - will get their survival neatly packaged with the price tag explaining that the taxpayer is paying for it, and how much.

The average cost of treating someone who is HIV positive is £18,000 a year - although this is falling as new drugs come of licence and generics can be bought; plus early diagnosis and intervention is improving outcomes all the time.
If I were diagnosed with HIV, which is still a difficult diagnosis to receive however skilfully delivered and however no-judgementally it is discussed, I would feel bad enough without getting a label on my drugs every month bearing "This NHS medicine cost £1,500 funded by the taxpayer"

This is a very nasty, pernicious idea. No surprise coming from one fascist among many others on the front bench.
What's the idea? People with HIV or Alzheimers or incurable cancer - are they supposed to feel guilt for the hand life has dealt them?
Are they supposed to say "Oh I won't bother with that extra 6 weeks with the medicine, it's a bit too dear, isn't it?"
Or maybe "I think I'll just progress to AIDs now I know how tough this is for the taxpayers out there"

Way to go, Jezza. Impose guilt trips on dying people. That'll help.
A while back, my MP Philip Lee who is also a doctor wanted patients to be given a print out of the costs each time we saw the doctor and had treatment.

God knows what diabolical ideas are shunted around when those nasty shits hang out together.

Edited because I was distracted by Mr Ohso... Put doctors when it should have been patients.

Two of mine cost £34.50 a month (30 days) each. The rest, around a fiver altogether. I'm not looking forward to seeing my marked packages. I already know how much they cost and how grateful I am to current tax-payers for the help and support I get. Don't need it rubbed in my face. Jezza and Lee and their ilk are, indeed, nasty shits.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:57 pm

ephemerid wrote:Jeremy Hunt is an utter fuckwit.

All that water he imbibes for homeopathy is on his brain.
Correction - IS his brain.
A quack therapy, moreover, that is not good enough for his kids when their sniffles make him drag them off to A&E....
But I digress.

I am chronically sick and I take 8 medications regularly. They are very common treatments, with expired licences, and are thus prescribed in generic form. This is excellent, as the most expensive weighs in at 91 pence for a whole month's supply.
If I lived in England, my monthly prescription, currently costing the NHS less than a tenner (including inhalers, which I use rarely as my GP has a chronic disease management clinic and anyway they only cost £25 a year) would be £64 for the minimum.
The vast majority of prescriptions issued in the UK are for common medications, especially in older people, which cost very little but save lives - eg. statins, anti-hypotensives - and routine generic painkillers, anti-depressants, and anti-biotics.

Next year, when C(h)unt asks his SPAD how many of those prescriptions got his new NHS-taxpayer-funded label on for being more than £20, the answer will be....not a lot.

Expensive drugs are invariably the specialist drugs, usually sold under licence and thus with no generic alternative, which are prescribed for very serious and not very common conditions. Specialist anti-retro-virals for HIV/Heps, immuno-suppressive drugs for transplantation support, cancer treatments, new experimental drugs for Alzheimers, or specific medicines to extend the life of some cancer patients, are examples.

So the people who need to take very expensive medication in order to have a better quality of what's left of their lives - or indeed, have any life left to live at all - will get their survival neatly packaged with the price tag explaining that the taxpayer is paying for it, and how much.

The average cost of treating someone who is HIV positive is £18,000 a year - although this is falling as new drugs come of licence and generics can be bought; plus early diagnosis and intervention is improving outcomes all the time.
If I were diagnosed with HIV, which is still a difficult diagnosis to receive however skilfully delivered and however no-judgementally it is discussed, I would feel bad enough without getting a label on my drugs every month bearing "This NHS medicine cost £1,500 funded by the taxpayer"

This is a very nasty, pernicious idea. No surprise coming from one fascist among many others on the front bench.
What's the idea? People with HIV or Alzheimers or incurable cancer - are they supposed to feel guilt for the hand life has dealt them?
Are they supposed to say "Oh I won't bother with that extra 6 weeks with the medicine, it's a bit too dear, isn't it?"
Or maybe "I think I'll just progress to AIDs now I know how tough this is for the taxpayers out there"

Way to go, Jezza. Impose guilt trips on dying people. That'll help.

Whilst not disagreeing with a single word of the above, the whole thing could backfire by bringing it home - quite hard in some cases - just how much we need the NHS. Think of one of the I'm-alright-jack-I've-never-had-any-state-hand-outs types picking up their monthly migraine prescription and realising they simply could not afford to pay for it without the NHS, and it would not be covered by insurance because its a pre-existing condition.
(I picked migraine as I have an acquaintance who has suffered with it for years, had allsorts of tests including brain scans, and is now on some tablets costing £7.00 per day, not sure how long she'll be on them)

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 7:57 pm

Ha! Now I know how some of you feel during the football season.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:03 pm

ephemerid wrote:I am watching the divinely beautiful Dustin Brown engage in a war of attrition with the delightfully gorgeous force of nature that is Rafael Nadal.

I want Rafa to win - just because he fought so hard and for so long to overcome his various injuries. And he's a nice bloke off court.

Brown has done this before - and at Wimbledon too - and scared off a few big names only to flake out in his next game.

So I'm for lovely Rafa - especially if he keeps on with the death-ray stares at the line judge - but whatever happens I hope I don't miss anything delicious mid-swoon......then they can have those boys washed and brought to my tent.

I'll fight you for first dibs on Dustin Brown

We just missed seeing him on court at Roehampton on the last day of Qualifying. Today's win for him was after a stunning match and I hope he can keep it up against Troicki. I feel for Rafa, though; and hope he'll be able to come back in to challenge in the US Open.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:05 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Simply astonishing stuff.

Some of his returns were just stunning.

Fully deserved win.

Yes he did - deserve to win that is.

I woke Mr Riots up out of his stupor with my bursts of laughter at the sheer audacity of some of his shots. He was dinking the ball around ... and his coach's face was a sight to behold - disbelief.

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:23 pm

Further plans from on high:

Ministers are considering forcing all housing benefit recipients to contribute towards their rent as part of efforts to save £12bn from the welfare bill, government sources say.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33353318

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:26 pm

Yes, he deserved to win. And I deserve to watch him looking amazing all over again.....

I shall miss Rafa, though. He has been my favourite for a long time - he works so hard and has such flair. I think he has never quite got over the last round of injuries.

LadyC - so what if your meds cost what they cost? It's not about money. Even if it were, that hospital bed they help to keep you out of costs a lot more - and in more ways than one.

I'm off to post on TGS's blog now. Feel free to join in.....

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:38 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:
ohsocynical wrote:
ephemerid wrote:Jeremy Hunt is an utter fuckwit.

All that water he imbibes for homeopathy is on his brain.
Correction - IS his brain.
A quack therapy, moreover, that is not good enough for his kids when their sniffles make him drag them off to A&E....
But I digress.

I am chronically sick and I take 8 medications regularly. They are very common treatments, with expired licences, and are thus prescribed in generic form. This is excellent, as the most expensive weighs in at 91 pence for a whole month's supply.
If I lived in England, my monthly prescription, currently costing the NHS less than a tenner (including inhalers, which I use rarely as my GP has a chronic disease management clinic and anyway they only cost £25 a year) would be £64 for the minimum.
The vast majority of prescriptions issued in the UK are for common medications, especially in older people, which cost very little but save lives - eg. statins, anti-hypotensives - and routine generic painkillers, anti-depressants, and anti-biotics.

Next year, when C(h)unt asks his SPAD how many of those prescriptions got his new NHS-taxpayer-funded label on for being more than £20, the answer will be....not a lot.

Expensive drugs are invariably the specialist drugs, usually sold under licence and thus with no generic alternative, which are prescribed for very serious and not very common conditions. Specialist anti-retro-virals for HIV/Heps, immuno-suppressive drugs for transplantation support, cancer treatments, new experimental drugs for Alzheimers, or specific medicines to extend the life of some cancer patients, are examples.

So the people who need to take very expensive medication in order to have a better quality of what's left of their lives - or indeed, have any life left to live at all - will get their survival neatly packaged with the price tag explaining that the taxpayer is paying for it, and how much.

The average cost of treating someone who is HIV positive is £18,000 a year - although this is falling as new drugs come of licence and generics can be bought; plus early diagnosis and intervention is improving outcomes all the time.
If I were diagnosed with HIV, which is still a difficult diagnosis to receive however skilfully delivered and however no-judgementally it is discussed, I would feel bad enough without getting a label on my drugs every month bearing "This NHS medicine cost £1,500 funded by the taxpayer"

This is a very nasty, pernicious idea. No surprise coming from one fascist among many others on the front bench.
What's the idea? People with HIV or Alzheimers or incurable cancer - are they supposed to feel guilt for the hand life has dealt them?
Are they supposed to say "Oh I won't bother with that extra 6 weeks with the medicine, it's a bit too dear, isn't it?"
Or maybe "I think I'll just progress to AIDs now I know how tough this is for the taxpayers out there"

Way to go, Jezza. Impose guilt trips on dying people. That'll help.
A while back, my MP Philip Lee who is also a doctor wanted patients to be given a print out of the costs each time we saw the doctor and had treatment.

God knows what diabolical ideas are shunted around when those nasty shits hang out together.

Edited because I was distracted by Mr Ohso... Put doctors when it should have been patients.
Two of mine cost £34.50 a month (30 days) each. The rest, around a fiver altogether. I'm not looking forward to seeing my marked packages. I already know how much they cost and how grateful I am to current tax-payers for the help and support I get. Don't need it rubbed in my face. Jezza and Lee and their ilk are, indeed, nasty shits.

There is no need to be grateful for what is rightly yours. Health is a right, and if the only way you can have a modicum of good(ish?) health is medication - at whatever cost - then so be it.
I'm glad the NHS is able to help you

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:39 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:Further plans from on high:
Ministers are considering forcing all housing benefit recipients to contribute towards their rent as part of efforts to save £12bn from the welfare bill, government sources say.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33353318

So instead of trying to get landlords to reduce their rent, they'll just reduce housing benefit that'll end up with people forced to move out?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:39 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:Further plans from on high:
Ministers are considering forcing all housing benefit recipients to contribute towards their rent as part of efforts to save £12bn from the welfare bill, government sources say.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33353318

But this surely means more evictions, more arrears, more homeless, more local authorities having to find temporary housing for people in dire need, more people losing jobs because they don't have a base, more housing associations and councils with mounting financial and provision problems they can't solve ... more misery for those who are least able to do anything about it.

If this is 'compassionate' ...

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:40 pm

ephemerid wrote:Yes, he deserved to win. And I deserve to watch him looking amazing all over again.....

I shall miss Rafa, though. He has been my favourite for a long time - he works so hard and has such flair. I think he has never quite got over the last round of injuries.

LadyC - so what if your meds cost what they cost? It's not about money. Even if it were, that hospital bed they help to keep you out of costs a lot more - and in more ways than one.

I'm off to post on TGS's blog now. Feel free to join in.....

True on all points, ephe

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:45 pm

Forgive me if I'm wrong but didn't this used to be (in the good old Labour days) how our "Prevent" policy used to work ? Mentoring, places to talk and relax, snooker clubs etc.

It's become known as the Aarhus Model, a programme designed in Denmark's second city to dissuade young people from going to fight for al-Qaeda or Islamic State. Thirty travelled to Syria in 2013 but only two so far this year - and only one in 2014. Ahmed is one young man who was convinced, a few years ago, to draw back from the first step on a path that could have ended in jihad.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33344898" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:47 pm

Lisa Mckenzie ‏@redrumlisa · 10h10 hours ago  Poplar, London
Cleaners who protested outside Sotherbys yesterday for living wage while the Warhol was being sold 300mil Have all been sacked this morning

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:47 pm

Dog is back in his home - he's pleased to be here but is a pitiful sight and sound. He has been lying on his fleece doing a low crooning which we think is an attempt at his normal groany chat but his throat is raw and dry from the op so it sounds strained and wheezy. Poor boy. Mr Riots is lying down next to him as companion comfort. He's just told me that Celebrity Masterchef is on at 9. I've just told him that I'll be serving up beans on toast tonight.

Stressful day. Hope he's a bit more relaxed and back to himself tomorrow - dog and Mr Riots.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:51 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Lisa Mckenzie ‏@redrumlisa · 10h10 hours ago  Poplar, London
Cleaners who protested outside Sotherbys yesterday for living wage while the Warhol was being sold 300mil Have all been sacked this morning

I can't even thank you for that AAW - it's just too depressing. I hope that lawyer who was once a cleaner herself takes up their case ... and that Sothebys get a heap of bad publicity from it.

And Cameron thinks employers like this will just magically raise wages to offset him taking tax credit support away from the lowest paid ...

They are just shits.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 8:57 pm

Something from yesterday that I posted about at the other place.

I have no real clue about Parliamentary procedure but how is it possible that two members of a committee scrutinizing a bill come from a department sponsoring that bill...and then appear as witnesses in front of the committee of which they form a part?

The Committee consisted of the following Members: (incl.)
Gibb, Mr Nick (Minister for Schools)
Timpson, Edward (Minister for Children and Families)

Tuesday 30 June
Until no later than 5.00pm
Department for Education

who were...
Nick Gibb MP, Minister of State, Department for Education
Edward Timpson MP, Minister of State, Department for Education
The Lord Nash, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education

How do they get away with that?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:00 pm

Goodnight, everyone.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:02 pm

Incidentally it's worth having a read of the first session of the Education and Adoption Bill in committee stage...and full marks to Kevin Brennan for pointing out what a dog's breakfast it is...and how little time the academics have to discuss it.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 630s01.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The definition of what 'coasting' means was published at 10pm the previous evening.

Post by **letsskiptotheleft** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:07 pm

I'd like to do away with 'coasting' politicians, luckily for such individuals, there's enough fools out there to re-elect them.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:13 pm

BBCQT tonight
On the panel are Conservative health secretary Jeremy Hunt MP, Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn MP, Anne McElvoy of The Economist, comedian Shappi Khorsandi and Douglas Murray of The Spectator.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:18 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:BBCQT tonight
On the panel are Conservative health secretary Jeremy Hunt MP, Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn MP, Anne McElvoy of The Economist, comedian Shappi Khorsandi and Douglas Murray of The Spectator.

I pointed out earlier that I expect Murray is on there because of the ISIS/ISIL/bad guys situation.

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:19 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:BBCQT tonight
On the panel are Conservative health secretary Jeremy Hunt MP, Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn MP, Anne McElvoy of The Economist, comedian Shappi Khorsandi and Douglas Murray of The Spectator.

It's always the same. Three right wing loons, one Labour and one SNP/comedian. I like Shappi but she's not a politician. Why not three from the left one week, especially as DD will allow the loons to heckle throughout and will probably join in the heckling himself?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:22 pm

Reading that committee evidence...

Robert Hill: I am a big fan of progress measures. I think you are absolutely in the right ballpark doing that. Indeed, I think we should be looking at progress within student cohorts, within schools from one class to another. I do not think we should construct a national system to do that, but that should be the discipline that we apply. I think that progress in that sense is king, so you are in the right ballpark.

On your King Solomon point, absolutely all credit to King Solomon and others. Although, when you look at the distribution, the number of schools both from affluent and certainly deprived areas that are bucking that trend, closing the gap and doing that is a very small cohort.

The regrettable truth, for someone who supports the development of multi-academy trusts, is that for every one that has been compulsorily academised that has worked, you will be aware that there have been a considerable number that have struggled and are still struggling, and are still in something akin to that spiral. You are having to re-broker, I think, 100 sponsored academies and another 100 are in the pipeline. My concern, if I share your ambition, which I do, is where is the resource and support?

Just declaring them “coasting” or “requiring improvement” is in some ways the easy bit. The much tougher bit is to get the right mechanisms and support systems in place, as it were, to drive the improvement. That is where I think the Bill is in the wrong place. Although there are clauses in the Bill that do broaden the scope of things that you as Minister and local authorities and school commissioners can do, that is the real challenge for the education system.

Ouch.

That must hurt Gibb who's a "Nothing to see here! Everything's fine!" ideologue.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:34 pm

Heh. There's a surprise...

Q 21 Kevin Brennan: I will ask one question and then pass it over to colleagues, as they will not otherwise get a chance to ask questions. In dealing with an inadequate school, is academisation the only way to bring about satisfactory improvement—why is it that the Bill says that Ministers must, when they find an inadequate school, organise its academisation? Could you each offer a short, “Just a Minute” type answer—in fact, one word will do. Start with one word each.

Malcolm Trobe: No.

Sir Daniel Moynihan: Yes.

Emma Knights: No.

Richard Watts: No.

Moynihan is such an arse-licker - that's how he got his gong.

He used to be fine when he was my kid's HT at his Ofsted-Outstanding school but turned against local authorities when he moved to Harris.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 9:45 pm

The Spectator summer party, in pictures -
Try to scroll though them all (they are a bit sickening) as they show how close the press are to the tory's, which I know we already know but....

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/ ... -pictures/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 10:04 pm

PorFavor wrote:Goodnight, everyone.

Goodnight, PorFavor

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 10:06 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:The Spectator summer party, in pictures -
Try to scroll though them all (they are a bit sickening) as they show how close the press are to the tory's, which I know we already know but....

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/ ... -pictures/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alan Duncan's head looks weird - like it's been photoshopped on!

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 10:14 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:The Spectator summer party, in pictures -
Try to scroll though them all (they are a bit sickening) as they show how close the press are to the tory's, which I know we already know but....

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/ ... -pictures/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Alan Duncan's head looks weird - like it's been photoshopped on!

LOL! and Cameron looks sloshed in the 3rd one down.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 10:28 pm

Still reading...and this is why I can't stand Nick Gibb.

Q 41 Mr Gibb: I have a question for Sir Daniel. You will be aware that the Bill tackles maintained schools, because the Secretary of State already has the ability to intervene in failing academies through her funding agreement with academy chains and academy trusts. You will also be aware that academies that have been sponsored academy secondary schools for four years have improved their results by 6.4 percentage points, compared with 1% for those schools in local authority control over the same period. Can you inform the Committee what it is you do at Harris, in terms of school improvement, that is so different from what happens in a local authority? We touched on it a little, but can you go into a bit more detail on the kind of things you do?

Why is that even relevant - it looks like it's just been chucked in as a "Ooh, aren't academies wonderful everybody?"

As has been pointed out before by many people - sponsored academies are generally starting from a lower base so find it easier to make greater leaps in improvements.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Thu 02 Jul, 2015 10:34 pm

Q 48 Bill Esterson: Sir Daniel, do you agree that local authorities should be able to take over if they are high performing?

Sir Daniel Moynihan: I don’t, actually. No.

Q 49 Bill Esterson: Okay. So we are not interested in high quality.

Sir Daniel Moynihan: It depends. How do you define local authorities as high performing? They are not directly responsible for the management of their schools, so what does that mean? If the schools in a local authority are doing well, does that mean the local authority is high performing? I think the headteachers of those schools would have something to say about that; their view would be that they have delivered.

Wait...

Sir Daniel Moynihan: It depends. How do you define local authorities as high performing? They are not directly responsible for the management of their schools, so what does that mean? If the schools in a local authority are doing well, does that mean the local authority is high performing?

Oh, so the line we;ve had for five years about "local authority-run schools" from Give and his pals is utter nonsense then?

Thanks for clearing that up...