Tuesday 21st July 2015

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 2:31 pm

List of Labour amendments Work and Welfare Bill.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... a.1-7.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 2:53 pm

And impact assessments of other changes

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/201 ... ments.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 3:03 pm

Afternoon all.

So Osborne wants a further 20bn of cuts by the end of this parliament - that's on top of the 12bn taken out of 'welfare'. Hmmmm ... those predictions of him wanting to take us back to levels of public spending not experienced since the 1930s seem spot on now. (I see ever more synchronicity with that old salute practicing image making its appearance.)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 3:10 pm

http://www.hmbsolicitors.co.uk/news/cat ... et_id=1626" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

COURT OF APPEAL RULES AGAINST SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS ON ‘BEDROOM TAX’; RULES THAT URGENT APPEALS MUST BE HEARD BEFORE END OF YEAR

Today, the Court of Appeal has ruled that two appeals concerning the dire effects of the so-called ‘bedroom tax’ on vulnerable individuals must be heard urgently. One appeal, brought by a woman known only as ‘A,’ concerns the effect of the policy on women living in ‘Sanctuary Scheme’ homes – properties which are specially adapted because of risks to the lives and physical safety of women and children who live in them. The second appeal (brought by Paul and Susan Rutherford and their grandson Warren) concerns the impact of the policy on disabled children who need overnight care. In both appeals, it is argued that the bedroom tax policy unlawfully discriminates – against women and domestic violence victims, and against seriously disabled children requiring overnight care.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 3:13 pm

HindleA wrote:http://www.hmbsolicitors.co.uk/news/cat ... et_id=1626

COURT OF APPEAL RULES AGAINST SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS ON ‘BEDROOM TAX’; RULES THAT URGENT APPEALS MUST BE HEARD BEFORE END OF YEAR

Today, the Court of Appeal has ruled that two appeals concerning the dire effects of the so-called ‘bedroom tax’ on vulnerable individuals must be heard urgently. One appeal, brought by a woman known only as ‘A,’ concerns the effect of the policy on women living in ‘Sanctuary Scheme’ homes – properties which are specially adapted because of risks to the lives and physical safety of women and children who live in them. The second appeal (brought by Paul and Susan Rutherford and their grandson Warren) concerns the impact of the policy on disabled children who need overnight care. In both appeals, it is argued that the bedroom tax policy unlawfully discriminates – against women and domestic violence victims, and against seriously disabled children requiring overnight care.

Thank you HindleA. Been waiting for that announcement to appear. I so bloody hope that Paul, Susan and Warren win this one.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 3:14 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:Afternoon all.

So Osborne wants a further 20bn of cuts by the end of this parliament - that's on top of the 12bn taken out of 'welfare'. Hmmmm ... those predictions of him wanting to take us back to levels of public spending not experienced since the 1930s seem spot on now. (I see ever more synchronicity with that old salute practicing image making its appearance.)

It won't happen. He had to row back from those £12bn in the budget. He's hit on a formula where he talks really tough, then overspends his target, pretends he hasn't. and ridicules people who made dire predictions and accuses them of wanting to spend more.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 4:16 pm

http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2015/07/go ... s-a-whole/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The keen eyed will note that the government have already borrowed more in the first quarter of the year than they originally planned to borrow in the year as a whole.

When the Chancellor can do this and still get away with ridiculing you for profligacy, there's not much you can do.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 4:20 pm

His luck will run out sooner or later - it would be nice if HM Official Opposition did their bit to hasten that day, though......

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 4:23 pm

I seriously doubt many people are even aware of some of the changes that we are constantly told the majority are in favour of.Certainly,some are not even mentioned the BBC in particular scrupiously avoiding ones that may not be popular, it spoils their narrative.,the ones they do mention,shall we say far from.the whole truth in their outlining ,to be overgenerous.Very easy to fall into the trap of taking responses to a poll to extrapolate overall support.Scratch the surface,and it falls away.Ask specific questions relating to real life and situations and it all but disappears.Either way a mob mentality is dangerous as a gauge of what to do,indeed it is democracies antithesis.At times like this ever more important to give a different view.Not least because we are in danger of not only ignoring ever more larger sections of Society,we are actively targetting them on no pretext beyond" it will get us votes".Not so much sleepwalking into a fascistic horrorland,but speedily going towards it with alacrity.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 4:24 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:His luck will run out sooner or later - it would be nice if HM Official Opposition did their bit to hasten that day, though......

What can they do?

Lots of people on the left (inside and outside of Labour) have no interest in what the figures actually are. Gets in the way of their "strong anti-austerity message".

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 4:42 pm

Chancellor demolishes Reading's plans to build 1,000 council homes

Measures in the summer budget blast a £233 million hole in the council's housing revenue account and lay waste its 30 year building plan

An emergency measure was brought to the Reading Borough Council policy committee last night, Monday, July 20, to tell councillors of the bombshell dropped by the Chancellor in his summer budget which has destroyed hopes of tackling the housing crisis in the town.
At one of the gloomiest council meetings in recent years with £7 million worth of cuts on the agenda, council managing director Ian Wardle broke the news of the effect of the Welfare Reform and Work Bill 2015 being debated today and which, if passed, will bring in a one per cent reduction in social landlord rents - including local authorities - for four years from 2016.
According to the report to the committee this “negates the national rent policy set last year” by Tory housing minister Grant Schapps, which the council based its calculations on

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local- ... ld-9697311

Sorry---but---bastard!

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 4:47 pm

Rob Wilson MP admits 9p expenses claims should not have been made

Reading East MP appreciates the tiny claims might give the impression of 'penny-pinching MPs'

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/local- ... 9p-9698152

Might give the impression?

I'd read on Twitter about an MP claiming 9 pence for travel or somesuch expense.

Lo and behold it's this Tory tosser.

Doesn't surprise me.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 4:48 pm

I noted elsewhere what emphasis this lot seem to give when dealing with schools.

Nick Gibb yesterday
Mr Gibb: I can give the hon. Gentleman this piece of evidence: 25% of the free schools that have been inspected so far are rated outstanding, compared with just 19% of other schools.

Treasury today
number of pupils taught in good or outstanding schools has increased by over a million since 2010

Yes, you guessed it - when you take Good or Outstanding free schools, the percentages are lower than all schools - 77% against 84%

He's a crafty bugger is Gibb - don't trust him at all on any subject.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 5:08 pm

: Numpty Memes Liberal Democrats.jpg (49.69 KiB) Viewed 5260 times

Isabel Hardman ‏@IsabelHardman 11m11 minutes ago
Normally just numpties make up memes on social media. The Lib Dems have 8 MPs and are pumping out this stuff

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 5:30 pm

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

When Labour lost its soul, and the next election

http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com ... ubble.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

REALITY VS THE BUBBLE

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 5:47 pm

"likelihood that someone else – Starmer, Jarvis, Creasy or a currently unknown, will take us into the election"

http://thoughcowardsflinch.com/2015/07/ ... dian-knot/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am beginning to think that may be so.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 5:54 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:"likelihood that someone else – Starmer, Jarvis, Creasy or a currently unknown, will take us into the election"

http://thoughcowardsflinch.com/2015/07/ ... dian-knot/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am beginning to think that may be so.

The best time to hold another election would be at the same time that the Tories do - the press will be so busy promoting one of their favourites (Boris/Osborne/May) that they won't be bothered with Labour.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 5:55 pm

What was Harriet Harman thinking?
Harriet Harman has suffered a blow over the Welfare Bill - but she didn't have a lot of other options.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... n-thinking" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:06 pm

Sophia Cannon ‏@UndercoverMutha 22 hrs22 hours ago

Loyalty is doing what you're told regardless of what is right
Morality is doing what is right regardless of what you're told

True that !

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:11 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:"likelihood that someone else – Starmer, Jarvis, Creasy or a currently unknown, will take us into the election"

http://thoughcowardsflinch.com/2015/07/ ... dian-knot/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am beginning to think that may be so.
The best time to hold another election would be at the same time that the Tories do - the press will be so busy promoting one of their favourites (Boris/Osborne/May) that they won't be bothered with Labour.

We might think that ... but can imagine two of those three Tory contenders, and one in particular, having a lot of game playing going on behind the media scenes which might include making sure they carry out some dastardly attacks on targeted Labour bods they don't like the look of - especially those that might be good leaders.

It's also a long way off - and fairly close to the next election. I find it very hard to imagine the context and scenarios that might be present then - will we have voted in or out of the EU, will we have committed to another war, will the economy be thriving or tanking ... will Labour have managed to stay united or be splintering? Would the incumbent Labour leader be willing to step aside or would it be a messy coup?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:15 pm

Mark D'Arcy ‏@DArcyTiP 1h1 hour ago
Govt defeat in @UKHouseofLords peers vote 320-139 in favour of motion to create special Ctee on #EVEL with MPs. How will ministers respond?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:19 pm

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

Labour’s capitulation on welfare reveals the vacuum in its soul
Bryan Gould

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:29 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:"likelihood that someone else – Starmer, Jarvis, Creasy or a currently unknown, will take us into the election"

http://thoughcowardsflinch.com/2015/07/ ... dian-knot/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am beginning to think that may be so.
The best time to hold another election would be at the same time that the Tories do - the press will be so busy promoting one of their favourites (Boris/Osborne/May) that they won't be bothered with Labour.
We might think that ... but can imagine two of those three Tory contenders, and one in particular, having a lot of game playing going on behind the media scenes which might include making sure they carry out some dastardly attacks on targeted Labour bods they don't like the look of - especially those that might be good leaders.

It's also a long way off - and fairly close to the next election. I find it very hard to imagine the context and scenarios that might be present then - will we have voted in or out of the EU, will we have committed to another war, will the economy be thriving or tanking ... will Labour have managed to stay united or be splintering? Would the incumbent Labour leader be willing to step aside or would it be a messy coup?

The major problem is that there is zero enthusiasm, none zip, for the two leading contenders. Corbyn gets enthusiastic support from, say, Owen Jones. Kendall gets it from, say, me. But neither of them will win.

Is there anyone other than their immediate family who is enthusiastic for Burnham or Cooper?

Burnham came a distant fourth in 2010. It is clearer than ever why this was so.

Cooper isn't even the best candidate in her own immediate family.

AJ should have stood as an interim leader. We could have all united behind him, and had a proper contest in 2018.

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:30 pm

Hi. Do you still run the Groan awards? Because they have published the worst article winner today.

Labour rebelled against Harman because she's a woman. I can scarcely complete that sentence without despairing at what's become of both party and paper.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:37 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote: The best time to hold another election would be at the same time that the Tories do - the press will be so busy promoting one of their favourites (Boris/Osborne/May) that they won't be bothered with Labour.
We might think that ... but can imagine two of those three Tory contenders, and one in particular, having a lot of game playing going on behind the media scenes which might include making sure they carry out some dastardly attacks on targeted Labour bods they don't like the look of - especially those that might be good leaders.

It's also a long way off - and fairly close to the next election. I find it very hard to imagine the context and scenarios that might be present then - will we have voted in or out of the EU, will we have committed to another war, will the economy be thriving or tanking ... will Labour have managed to stay united or be splintering? Would the incumbent Labour leader be willing to step aside or would it be a messy coup?

The major problem is that there is zero enthusiasm, none zip, for the two leading contenders. Corbyn gets enthusiastic support from, say, Owen Jones. Kendall gets it from, say, me. But neither of them will win.

Is there anyone other than their immediate family who is enthusiastic for Burnham or Cooper?

Burnham came a distant fourth in 2010. It is clearer than ever why this was so.

Cooper isn't even the best candidate in her own immediate family.

AJ should have stood as an interim leader. We could have all united behind him, and had a proper contest in 2018.

Ah yes, lazy overrated AJ who couldn't even beat Harman back in 2007 (and I voted for him then - and actually like the man)

It is possible either of the "mainstream" candidates could actually impress us in the job - expectations are pretty low right now so that is a bonus for them.

If not, then.......

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:38 pm

Doctor's petition to sack Jeremy Hunt gets 100,000 signatures on first DAY of new website

Furious medic Ash Sadighi set up the petition and it's surged over the threshold, making it the first to be debated by a new group of MPs

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/do ... nt-6107962

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:41 pm

NonOxCol wrote:Hi. Do you still run the Groan awards? Because they have published the worst article winner today.

Labour rebelled against Harman because she's a woman. I can scarcely complete that sentence without despairing at what's become of both party and paper.

Yes I have had my attention drawn to that genuinely unbelievable mindblowing monstrosity

Something that would have been rejected as far too silly by the Daily Mash.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:45 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote: The best time to hold another election would be at the same time that the Tories do - the press will be so busy promoting one of their favourites (Boris/Osborne/May) that they won't be bothered with Labour.
We might think that ... but can imagine two of those three Tory contenders, and one in particular, having a lot of game playing going on behind the media scenes which might include making sure they carry out some dastardly attacks on targeted Labour bods they don't like the look of - especially those that might be good leaders.

It's also a long way off - and fairly close to the next election. I find it very hard to imagine the context and scenarios that might be present then - will we have voted in or out of the EU, will we have committed to another war, will the economy be thriving or tanking ... will Labour have managed to stay united or be splintering? Would the incumbent Labour leader be willing to step aside or would it be a messy coup?

The major problem is that there is zero enthusiasm, none zip, for the two leading contenders. Corbyn gets enthusiastic support from, say, Owen Jones. Kendall gets it from, say, me. But neither of them will win.

Is there anyone other than their immediate family who is enthusiastic for Burnham or Cooper?

Burnham came a distant fourth in 2010. It is clearer than ever why this was so.

Cooper isn't even the best candidate in her own immediate family.

AJ should have stood as an interim leader. We could have all united behind him, and had a proper contest in 2018.

I only follow a handful of people on twitter but there are both Cooper and Burnham fans among them. The thing about moderates, as opposed to those on the extremes, is they tend to be moderate. They are the silent majority. Only when they vote will their preferences become clear.
As for AJ being a uniting figure

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 6:52 pm

NonOxCol wrote:Hi. Do you still run the Groan awards? Because they have published the worst article winner today.

Labour rebelled against Harman because she's a woman. I can scarcely complete that sentence without despairing at what's become of both party and paper.

And sadly that line probably came from a Labour party source - there was a paragraph in the Staggers article on what was Harman thinking that I linked to earlier - which made me spit. It more or less said the women among the new intake of MPs who voted against had betrayed Harman - they should have supported her because of all she's done for women - they wouldn't have been in parliament but for her apparently.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:01 pm

PM plans patient data grab in proposals for seven-day NHS
Privacy campaigners raise concerns over NHS official’s letter to IT companies asking for confidential data for patients who get a ‘seven-day’ service
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... en-day-nhs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

... A senior official in the NHS, Tracey Grainger, who runs the prime minister’s challenge fund which disburses monies for the plan, wrote last month to IT companies asking for confidential data for patients who get a “seven-day” service.

In this latest attempt to build a large-scale patient database to allow GP workloads to be assessed, Grainger asked the IT firms for the date, time and duration of appointments as well as the reason for the consultation. Most of the postcode of the patient is also asked for, as well as their year of birth...

... it is the potential re-identification of patients that has sparked a privacy row.

“Under the law, GPs are the data controllers of patient information. They are the people who can decide whether this should be released or not. IT companies cannot do this,” said Phil Booth, coordinator of patient privacy advocates medConfidential.

The creation of a new database of identifiable patient data from the information collected by the prime minister’s team would be a first in the NHS, says Booth. “You cannot claim to be collecting de-identified data when it’s clear you can re-identify it yourself.”...

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:15 pm

WTF is it with Blairites obsession with Alan Johnson?

He rose to prominence as a union leader, if he had charisma I missed it and his public speaking was at best forgettable. In government the best that could be said is that he was a relatively safe pair of hands. He was the worst shadow chancellor in history and his one redeeming feature is that he doesn't suffer from an ego and didn't fall for the leadership hype.

Yet they talk about him like he had magical powers. Barking.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:38 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2015/07/go ... s-a-whole/

The keen eyed will note that the government have already borrowed more in the first quarter of the year than they originally planned to borrow in the year as a whole.
When the Chancellor can do this and still get away with ridiculing you for profligacy, there's not much you can do.

Public Sector Finances, June 2015
Part of Public Sector Finances, June 2015 Release
Released: 21 July 2015

Public sector net debt excluding public sector banks (PSND ex) was £1,513.4 billion (81.5% GDP) at the end of June 2015, which was £77.4 billion, or 5.4% higher than in June 2014. This increase was a result of:

- £82.0 billion of public sector net borrowing
- less £0.8 billion in timing differences between cash flows for gilt interest payments and the accrued gilt interest flows
- less £3.8 billion in net cash transactions related to acquisition or disposal of financial assets of equivalent value (for example loans) and timing of recording

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/psa/publi ... -borrowing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Osborne's Chancellorship has given the UK the highest public sector net debt ever.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united- ... ebt-to-gdp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The link above has a chart updated today.
It's impossible to have a rational discussion about public versus private debt, deficient spending, government borrowing implications (not all borrowing is necessarily a problem) & government's responsibilities toward providing the country & people with public services protecting the people & country when the information most people are exposed to is deliberately disingenuous.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:48 pm

Tommy Sheppard MP ‏@TommySheppard 21 hrs21 hours ago

So just to be clear - Tories had 308 for their welfare bill. If Labour had all voted against Govt it would have been defeated

Is this right?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:48 pm

Richard Benyon ‏@RichardBenyonMP 2h2 hours ago
SNP have occupied Opposition front bench Labour looking furious

The game playing by all parties is getting me right peed off now. I would like MPs to be focused on who they are meant to be representing rather than how to get one up on whichever other party / ies they feel like needling. This applies to the lot of them.

TechnicalEphemera · Post by **TechnicalEphemera** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:49 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
NonOxCol wrote:Hi. Do you still run the Groan awards? Because they have published the worst article winner today.

Labour rebelled against Harman because she's a woman. I can scarcely complete that sentence without despairing at what's become of both party and paper.
And sadly that line probably came from a Labour party source - there was a paragraph in the Staggers article on what was Harman thinking that I linked to earlier - which made me spit. It more or less said the women among the new intake of MPs who voted against had betrayed Harman - they should have supported her because of all she's done for women - they wouldn't have been in parliament but for her apparently.

I assume nobody in the Labour Party actually is so stupid to believe that.

Incidentally I agree with Hugo's point that the PLP is considerably less left wing than the activists. Indeed the point of Miliband's electoral system was to prevent a situation where an MP could become leader without a substantial body of support in the PLP.

So why did Labour MPs lend their nominations to Corbyn?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:50 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Tommy Sheppard MP ‏@TommySheppard 21 hrs21 hours ago

So just to be clear - Tories had 308 for their welfare bill. If Labour had all voted against Govt it would have been defeated

Is this right?

No.

The government have a majority and there were no rebels.

He's talking out of his arse.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:53 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Tommy Sheppard MP ‏@TommySheppard 21 hrs21 hours ago

So just to be clear - Tories had 308 for their welfare bill. If Labour had all voted against Govt it would have been defeated

Is this right?

There was some pretty strong tweeting back at Sheppard by Iain Martin (political commentator) last night insisting he was tweeting rubbish and saying the system of pairing was in operation so his statement is incorrect.

I've not seen anything else since. But - as per my post above - I am so fed up with the endless trying to rile people up and point score. The tweets war - Labour getting very annoyed at SNP tweets saying they voted one way or another when they haven't etc - has been going on all through this parliamentary session. As has the bench war.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 7:59 pm

Crikey! Boris Johnson isn’t PM material after all
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... on-pm-tory" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cheer yourselves up with this.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 8:11 pm

HindleA wrote:List of Labour amendments Work and Welfare Bill.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... a.1-7.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A clearer outlining of amendments.
http://andrewgwynne.co.uk/2015/07/21/gw ... fare-bill/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plus Reducing from 39 weeks to 13 weeks for the waiting period for an application for a loan for mortgage interest.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 8:18 pm

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... -extremism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

State-sanctioned prejudice is at the heart of David Cameron's approach to countering extremism
Behind the Prime Minister's self-serving speech about fighting extremist views is an illiberal attack on our freedoms.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 8:22 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Richard Benyon ‏@RichardBenyonMP 2h2 hours ago
SNP have occupied Opposition front bench Labour looking furious
The game playing by all parties is getting me right peed off now. I would like MPs to be focused on who they are meant to be representing rather than how to get one up on whichever other party / ies they feel like needling. This applies to the lot of them.

Tory MP for Newbury, Richard Benyon, private sector landlord, housing benefit funded property owner, profiteering rentier extraction unit, "too much is never enough - if you're a Tory..." shouldn't call so much attention to himself. He really ought not do such a thing, given his representation of the UK people as a whole as a Tory MP architect & co-legislator for the worst Tory government ever passing legislation harming the well-being of people. He dares open his mouth to taunt representatives who DID NOT write, support or vote for legislation Richard Benyon's Tory party wrote, endorsed, voted for? He's jeering at others while he & his Tory party's Welfare Bill is passed?

He didn't show his face yesterday, what's he opening his absent mouth for?

He showed for the passage of the following:

Summer Budget 2015 Resolution 3 — Inheritance Tax — 14 Jul 2015
The budget raised the effective inheritance tax threshold to £1 million.
Authorises the Finance Bill to provide (including provision having retrospective effect) for:
* the inheritance tax treatment of settled property;
* the introduction of a new nil-rate band when a residence is passed to direct descendants; and
* a freeze in the existing nil rate band for the tax years 2018-19, 2019-2020 and 2020-21.
The new nil rate band is the mechanism by which the effective inheritance tax threshold was raised to £1 million. A nil rate band is another term for the threshold at which inheritance tax becomes payable; the existing threshold at the time of the vote was £325,000.

Richard Benyon MP, Newbury voted to make changes to inheritance tax including raising the effective threshold for starting to pay inheritance tax to £1 million.

http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.p ... se=commons" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 8:32 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Tommy Sheppard MP ‏@TommySheppard 21 hrs21 hours ago

So just to be clear - Tories had 308 for their welfare bill. If Labour had all voted against Govt it would have been defeated

Is this right?

The Labour party (including the 3 Social Democratic & Labour Party MPs) currently have 235 MPs in Parliament.
That information is available to Tommy Sheppard.
Is Tommy Sheppard, SNP MP for Edinburgh East, that confused?
He ought to get that looked at.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 8:35 pm

HindleA wrote:
HindleA wrote:List of Labour amendments Work and Welfare Bill.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... a.1-7.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A clearer outlining of amendments.
http://andrewgwynne.co.uk/2015/07/21/gw ... fare-bill/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plus Reducing from 39 weeks to 13 weeks for the waiting period for an application for a loan for mortgage interest.

Thank you for these, HindleA.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 8:59 pm

Jack of Kent ‏@JackofKent 4m4 minutes ago
If 0sborne's 40% cut hits MoJ, then there is no point MPs passing any more laws, as there will be no courts in which to enforce those laws.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 9:05 pm

I'm unimpressed by them offering reviews of bad benefit policies.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 9:11 pm

Sorry - but I just lurve this from BTL on the Boris isn't prime minister material article:

GreatBlah 49m ago
There are two Johnson MPs.

It would be amusing if Jo Johnson got party support instead....

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 9:17 pm

Spending review to include measures to reduce school back-office spending

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/spending-revie ... -spending/

Chancellor George Osborne will use the autumn spending review to “improve productivity” in schools as back-office services are targeted in a bid to save money.

In its spending review document, which sets out plans for a further £20m of departmental savings, the Treasury has re-affirmed the government’s commitment to protecting per-pupil funding for schools, but said there was “significant scope” for institutions to increase efficiency and productivity.

Building on measures announced in the budget in March, the document highlights that secondary school spending on back-office costs ranges from £202 to £1,432 per pupil, and “between 2003 and 2013, back-office spending per pupil in maintained schools increased by around 60 per cent in real terms”.

Right.

So what happens when they discover that the most efficient method of accounting for back office costs was to use the local authority which then has purchasing power to get the best deals for insurance, maintenance, energy etc etc?

And what happens when they discover that accountancy. legal and consultancy fees have gone through the roof because of all of the academy trusts now that have to produce final accounts to the standard of company ones?

Worth pointing out that comparing back office costs between schools really isn't that easy since it depends on where work is allocated. All of our teaching staff do nothing other than concentrate on pupil's learning - every bit of admin possible is carried out by office staff. That may not be the case everywhere hence our back office costs might be higher than other schools.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 9:24 pm

Yep.

"Back office" is meaningless in isolation. The old sack the administrators/ free up the teachers to teach lark.

Haven't LA's had a load of pupils taken out of them? Which, er, pushes up the cost per pupil?

If there has been some rampant loss of financial control, then wouldn't it have been better to do something about it?

mbc1955 · Post by **mbc1955** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 9:26 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Spending review to include measures to reduce school back-office spending

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/spending-revie ... -spending/

Chancellor George Osborne will use the autumn spending review to “improve productivity” in schools as back-office services are targeted in a bid to save money.

In its spending review document, which sets out plans for a further £20m of departmental savings, the Treasury has re-affirmed the government’s commitment to protecting per-pupil funding for schools, but said there was “significant scope” for institutions to increase efficiency and productivity.

Building on measures announced in the budget in March, the document highlights that secondary school spending on back-office costs ranges from £202 to £1,432 per pupil, and “between 2003 and 2013, back-office spending per pupil in maintained schools increased by around 60 per cent in real terms”.
Right.

So what happens when they discover that the most efficient method of accounting for back office costs was to use the local authority which then has purchasing power to get the best deals for insurance, maintenance, energy etc etc?

And what happens when they discover that accountancy. legal and consultancy fees have gone through the roof because of all of the academy trusts now that have to produce final accounts to the standard of company ones?

Worth pointing out that comparing back office costs between schools really isn't that easy since it depends on where work is allocated. All of our teaching staff do nothing other than concentrate on pupil's learning - every bit of admin possible is carried out by office staff. That may not be the case everywhere hence our back office costs might be higher than other schools.

What happens?

Nothing. Nothing happens. Nada, sweet FA, bupkiss, nothing.

It does not accord with the political dogma? It does not exist. And no newspaper, from The Mail to the increasingly worthless Guardian will print that it does. Wherever we go, may we spread ignorance, thick, juicy ignorance in front of every person who is eligible to vote.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 21 Jul, 2015 9:28 pm

Actually hang on! That's why they're not saying what it was in 2010, isn't it?

It shot up after the number of pupils in LAs came right down.