HindleA wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... nt-welfare
"One in six jobseekers have allowance stopped each year"
Can someone explain to me why Kids Company would be seen to be an example of Big Society? I thought BS was predicated on citizens doing good deeds for others and the general good on a voluntary, self directed basis - no? Kids Company relies on paid workers, including those with specialist skills and knowledge, and has clearly specified contracts and programmes of work ... or am I wrong?Andy Bell @andybell5news 2h2 hours ago
Cameron defended #kidscompany because seemed to be good example of Big Society at work now looks like it shows limits of that approach
Was "big society" ever officially defined?rebeccariots2 wrote:Can someone explain to me why Kids Company would be seen to be an example of Big Society? I thought BS was predicated on citizens doing good deeds for others and the general good on a voluntary, self directed basis - no? Kids Company relies on paid workers, including those with specialist skills and knowledge, and has clearly specified contracts and programmes of work ... or am I wrong?Andy Bell @andybell5news 2h2 hours ago
Cameron defended #kidscompany because seemed to be good example of Big Society at work now looks like it shows limits of that approach
Yes I did then went out and promptly forgot to reply on returning home.ephemerid wrote:Lovely - more will indeed be reviled, AAW! (I know, it was a typo)AngryAsWell wrote:
The leadership manifesto's are out tomorrow (I think) so more will be reviled ....maybe
BTW - did you see my response to your EMA post?
I always felt Big Society was a complete rip off - it seemed to be a relaunch and bid for ownership by Cameron of work that was already being done by a lot of charities and good, civic minded people. The kind of work done by hundreds of befriending projects all over the country for many years - as an example - or the groups of volunteers who do mass litter picks and clean ups together - as another. Either Cameron knew this work was already going on ... and tried to steal it and brand it as his own ... or he didn't and actually thought he was introducing something no one else had thought of or was doing. Both are equally offensive and typical of him IMO.Willow904 wrote:Was "big society" ever officially defined?rebeccariots2 wrote:Can someone explain to me why Kids Company would be seen to be an example of Big Society? I thought BS was predicated on citizens doing good deeds for others and the general good on a voluntary, self directed basis - no? Kids Company relies on paid workers, including those with specialist skills and knowledge, and has clearly specified contracts and programmes of work ... or am I wrong?Andy Bell @andybell5news 2h2 hours ago
Cameron defended #kidscompany because seemed to be good example of Big Society at work now looks like it shows limits of that approach
Anyway, even the organisation set up to promote the big society was wound up under a cloud of financial irregularity, so looking at the general pattern one could be forgiven for thinking the aim of the big society was to waste public money in a new and ever more inventive manner.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 29848.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Looks good, much the same as AB (and maybe YC?) has been talking about. Almost from last Labour manifesto in fact.ohsocynical wrote:JeremyCorbyn4Leader @Corbyn4Leader 1 hr1 hour ago
Tackling the Housing Crisis - Our housing policy is now online.
http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/housing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yep. He also got rid of MIRAS.TechnicalEphemera wrote:You are doing GB a disservice.gilsey wrote:You have put your finger on the reason I'll never rate GB as Chancellor. 'Prudence' and 'No More Boom and Bust', while presiding over the mother of all house price booms. That's what I thought at the time, now I suppose Osborne's boom is even more remarkable, given the recessionary backdrop.Willow904 wrote: Hopefully the topic will move onto housing soon. The one truly big error of the last Labour government was to allow house prices to balloon. It may not have been possible to see the financial crash coming, but house price inflation was right in front of them, yet they sanguinely ignored it. Osborne is deliberately stoking the housing bubble. How would a Labour government make housing more affordable without causing a damaging crash?
I don't think it would be possible to build the houses we need without a crash, basically that's why we're not building them. Homeowners vote.
The house price boom was a side effect of a decade of prosperity and historically low interest rates. Labour tried to offset this by ramping up stamp duty to prevent property speculation as per the 90s, and they were to a degree successful in that. They did at least avoid the house price crash of the early 90s and when a mini correction happened negative equity was largely avoided.
By Shiv Malik
One in six jobseekers have allowance stopped by DWP each year
Guardian research contradicts government claims that only a small minority of jobseekers have been affected by increasingly severe welfare policies
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... nt-welfare
They seem to be using twitter to publicise events, I follow them all to catch up on what they are up to.ephemerid wrote:I'm wondering about what pk1 said about the coverage Corbyn is getting.
I've asked Newsnight to tell me how often each of the candidates has appeared on the regular show (not the hustings) since May. If I get a reply, I'll tell you what they say.
I wonder if people ask to go on or if they get invited or both. It could be something really simple like certain people being on holiday, or people turning down a chance to appear.
I also think it's possible that as a "news" programme (yes, I know), the fact that Corbyn's all over the UK every day doing speeches and whatnot that he's getting more coverage.
He seems to making the news, and whether that's because he's a novelty or whatever I don't know.
The G has run many articles on Corbyn but in fact most of them have not been supportive. Some of them have been scathing.
I've looked through the candidates' events listings on their websites or wherever I can find the info.
Burnhams' website tells me there are no events near me or within a 100 mile radius; Kendall's has no information at all - and in both cases, you have to sign up as a supporter to get any more information.
Coopers' website has a list - a very long list - of phone bank events but not much else; some of these events have a note saying that X number of people have signed up for it, usually single figures.
What I can't find is lists of speeches and hustings for them - apart from the scheduled hustings, all I can find are interviews with the press that have already happened, and speeches that have already been reported on.
Corbyn's site only shows the upcoming events for the nest few days - but the rallies and Q&As include RSVPs. Thursday in Norwich, a rally, 1,545 RSVPs; Friday another one in Bradford, 425 RSVPs; Saturday morning a Q&A in Doncaster (439), and a rally in Leeds later (846).
He has been all over the place and shows no sign of flagging. He is also speaking to packed halls, standing room only in some cases.
The press are not generally known in recent years - and I include the BBC in this - to be particularly impartial. Maybe Corbyn (and Burnham to a lesser degree) is making the headlines more often because he's doing so much and there's a lot to report on.
I have to say that - even allowing for the fact that I am supporting Corbyn's bid - the other campaigns have been a bit lacklustre. Burnham picking up speed now; but Kendall seems to make a hash of things wherever she turns up, and I am not aware of any major speech or policy announcement Cooper has made in recent days. We had a campaign leaflet delivered from her team the other day, and I can't for the life of me understand how someone who is serious about their campaign could produce something so vague and lacking in real content.
I can understand the frustration of those who don't support Corbyn too see so little from the others and perhaps (depending on your view) a bit too much of Corbyn. But is there any evidence that any of the others are holding rallies on a daily basis and packing 'em to the rafters?
If there is, I'd love to see it. It's not a good contest if the participants aren't doing much contesting, is it? I'd rather they were all slugging it out.
I'm not sure I want a leader who isn't prepared to fight for what they believe in.
I'll try to find it, only skim read it so not 100% sureephemerid wrote:Newsnight hasn't responded yet (and I am not expecting much joy) but someone I know says that Corbyn has been on for a full interview twice, and the others once each (outside the hustings). I have no idea if she's correct!
I can't help feeling that the Corbyn candidacy not only came as a surprise to many, but the way it has taken off has shocked them. He is so very different from the others and such an unlikely person to have stood for leader, I suspect that the chatterati are horrified that not only has he got the brass neck to stand against the expected people he has gained so much support so quickly.
This is getting more interesting by the day. What is coming through from his manifesto policies so far is actually not that far away from many of Ed's manifesto pledges - Corbyn is not the "loony leftie" he has been painted to be after all.
Thanks to OhSo for linking to the housing document - I am liking the idea that councils get the right to build for their own needs, and I especially like the ideas on private landlords, rents allied to local earnings, and longer tenancies.
AAW - could you explain about the research facility in India? I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Being a bit thick, like.
Corbyn's support might be a protest against the other candidates. On the other hand he might simply have the message people want to hear...ephemerid wrote:Newsnight hasn't responded yet (and I am not expecting much joy) but someone I know says that Corbyn has been on for a full interview twice, and the others once each (outside the hustings). I have no idea if she's correct!
I can't help feeling that the Corbyn candidacy not only came as a surprise to many, but the way it has taken off has shocked them. He is so very different from the others and such an unlikely person to have stood for leader, I suspect that the chatterati are horrified that not only has he got the brass neck to stand against the expected people he has gained so much support so quickly.
This is getting more interesting by the day. What is coming through from his manifesto policies so far is actually not that far away from many of Ed's manifesto pledges - Corbyn is not the "loony leftie" he has been painted to be after all.
Thanks to OhSo for linking to the housing document - I am liking the idea that councils get the right to build for their own needs, and I especially like the ideas on private landlords, rents allied to local earnings, and longer tenancies.
AAW - could you explain about the research facility in India? I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Being a bit thick, like.
Corbyn's quite some way from Ed, and not in a good way.ephemerid wrote:Newsnight hasn't responded yet (and I am not expecting much joy) but someone I know says that Corbyn has been on for a full interview twice, and the others once each (outside the hustings). I have no idea if she's correct!
I can't help feeling that the Corbyn candidacy not only came as a surprise to many, but the way it has taken off has shocked them. He is so very different from the others and such an unlikely person to have stood for leader, I suspect that the chatterati are horrified that not only has he got the brass neck to stand against the expected people he has gained so much support so quickly.
This is getting more interesting by the day. What is coming through from his manifesto policies so far is actually not that far away from many of Ed's manifesto pledges - Corbyn is not the "loony leftie" he has been painted to be after all.
Thanks to OhSo for linking to the housing document - I am liking the idea that councils get the right to build for their own needs, and I especially like the ideas on private landlords, rents allied to local earnings, and longer tenancies.
AAW - could you explain about the research facility in India? I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Being a bit thick, like.
Here we goAngryAsWell wrote:I'll try to find it, only skim read it so not 100% sureephemerid wrote:Newsnight hasn't responded yet (and I am not expecting much joy) but someone I know says that Corbyn has been on for a full interview twice, and the others once each (outside the hustings). I have no idea if she's correct!
I can't help feeling that the Corbyn candidacy not only came as a surprise to many, but the way it has taken off has shocked them. He is so very different from the others and such an unlikely person to have stood for leader, I suspect that the chatterati are horrified that not only has he got the brass neck to stand against the expected people he has gained so much support so quickly.
This is getting more interesting by the day. What is coming through from his manifesto policies so far is actually not that far away from many of Ed's manifesto pledges - Corbyn is not the "loony leftie" he has been painted to be after all.
Thanks to OhSo for linking to the housing document - I am liking the idea that councils get the right to build for their own needs, and I especially like the ideas on private landlords, rents allied to local earnings, and longer tenancies.
AAW - could you explain about the research facility in India? I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Being a bit thick, like.
BRB
Could always use xxx.xxx.mp@parliament.ukStagger Lee wrote:Why do I torture myself. I've just wasted a few minutes of my time reading Dan Hodges latest piece, about Ted Heath. He might actually have some valid points in there about the nature of trial by media but it's all ruined by his predictably shrill and irritating style.
Then someone on my twitter feed shared the appalling Mac cartoon from the Mail.
I also wanted to reply to George's request for money saving ideas but sadly my suggestion of not spunking a billion pounds on a hasty and unnecessary sale of RBS shares will never be heard as they insist on me putting my work email address in!
I think I need a wash or, even a better a few pints.
so not just appearances by him & I was clearly not solely referring to Newsnight but the media generally.or the subject of discussion on Newsnight ?
Well I'm in the minority with youpk1 wrote:Re Corbyn & Newsnight, I did expressly say
so not just appearances by him & I was clearly not solely referring to Newsnight but the media generally.or the subject of discussion on Newsnight ?
Ok ok I get it folks, I'm in a minority because I don't go along with the Corbyn-mania that seems to have taken over the entire flipping country but hey-ho, there's nothing new in that !
AngryAsWell wrote:Well I'm in the minority with youpk1 wrote:Re Corbyn & Newsnight, I did expressly say
so not just appearances by him & I was clearly not solely referring to Newsnight but the media generally.or the subject of discussion on Newsnight ?
Ok ok I get it folks, I'm in a minority because I don't go along with the Corbyn-mania that seems to have taken over the entire flipping country but hey-ho, there's nothing new in that !
) The awful irony being that whether measures and decisions to take certain courses of actions are considered 'proportionate' is one of principles that often determines rulings on whether something is lawful or not ... from my limited experience of judicial review processes. But here we have magistrates totally unable to use their discretion re these new charges to ensure they are proportionate and practical given an individual's offence and circumstances.Law Society Gazette @lawsocgazette 49m49 minutes ago
Criminal court charges slammed by @TheHowardLeague after homeless man charged £150 for 99p drink theft: http://tinyurl.com/ptnoujb" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Don't think you're the minority. Apologies if I'm too loud.AngryAsWell wrote:Well I'm in the minority with youpk1 wrote:Re Corbyn & Newsnight, I did expressly say
so not just appearances by him & I was clearly not solely referring to Newsnight but the media generally.or the subject of discussion on Newsnight ?
Ok ok I get it folks, I'm in a minority because I don't go along with the Corbyn-mania that seems to have taken over the entire flipping country but hey-ho, there's nothing new in that !
ephemerid wrote:AAW - thank you for the link.
pk1 - you're not in a minority here, but I think I am......
When thinking about Labour & house building it's important to also remember the scale of refurbishment grants allocated to bring substandard properties up to habitable standards, including kitchen grants and inside toilet & bathroom facilities - 10,15 20K per property in some cases.onebuttonmonkey wrote:@ephemerid - as an aside that doesn't answer the other question, but might interest you, Corbyn said at the thing yesterday he'd done 43 events so far, not including the hustings. I've had invites from each of the others, so there's clearly lots going on. Somewhat predictably - and I shan't name them for fear of looking cheap - the mass-marketing from one of the candidates got which constituency I was in wrong. *sigh*
@no one in particular and everyone in general on New Labour and housing - although only a smaller element of it. There's this article from a few years ago on social housing and house building which I always thought was pretty fair on good and bad (unless anyone can correct me):
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/labours- ... 04.article
Brown would have done more had the crash not come along, certainly; 2007 was a start - whether that balances the too long with too little that went before it (certainly in terms of abysmal building rates and zero serious attempts to deflate a bubble tat suited them perfectly, as far as I'm concerned), well, I suspect some here may disagree with my "road to hell / good intentions / paving" type opinion.
(I like Gordon, by the way, will defend him from many things but I also get completely furious and despairing about him, too.)
You're not alone. I don't really get Corbyn's appeal either. I also feel his campaign wouldn't have taken off without the oxygen provided by the media. Their disapproval makes his appeal greater among those inclined to support him and the media are well aware of that. I feel they want Corbyn to do well because it could split the party in the way Ukip and the SNP have already split the left with their help.pk1 wrote:Re Corbyn & Newsnight, I did expressly say
so not just appearances by him & I was clearly not solely referring to Newsnight but the media generally.or the subject of discussion on Newsnight ?
Ok ok I get it folks, I'm in a minority because I don't go along with the Corbyn-mania that seems to have taken over the entire flipping country but hey-ho, there's nothing new in that !
Big Society (as distinct from volunteering, which we'd all done before) was basically "anybody but the state" delivering public services.rebeccariots2 wrote:Can someone explain to me why Kids Company would be seen to be an example of Big Society? I thought BS was predicated on citizens doing good deeds for others and the general good on a voluntary, self directed basis - no? Kids Company relies on paid workers, including those with specialist skills and knowledge, and has clearly specified contracts and programmes of work ... or am I wrong?Andy Bell @andybell5news 2h2 hours ago
Cameron defended #kidscompany because seemed to be good example of Big Society at work now looks like it shows limits of that approach
1) In a rash of enthusiasm you join your local Party, or sign up via Conservatives.com.
2) You pay a single, one-off fee of £25.
3) You get nothing in exchange for this.
4) Sometimes your data is shared with your local Conservative MP or candidate. But sometimes it isn’t.
5) Sometimes your data is shared with the leaders of your local Association. But sometimes it isn’t.
6) Your data will almost certainly *not* be shared with your local Conservative MEP, Assembly Member, Councillor, Area Chairman, Regional Chairman, or anyone more senior in National Convention, even though they have all been elected to represent you.
7) You will probably be told nothing about your local or regional Party.
8) Around this point, you will start to get letters asking you for money.
yahyah wrote:''Jeremy Corbyn's suggestion that Tony Blair could be tried for war crimes is based on a complete fantasy
The invasion of Iraq may have turned out to be a disaster, but it was not an illegal one''
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 41053.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That's a piece by Peter Jukes, who I like. He always seems sensible in a strange world.
Have to admit I sighed when I read what Corbyn had said.
Hmm...and the Tories managed (up until the 1990s recession) to reduce national debt you say?Tubby Isaacs wrote:
They reduced national assets, that's for sure.RogerOThornhill wrote:
Hmm...and the Tories managed (up until the 1990s recession) to reduce national debt you say?
This slur on slur rhetoric isn't going to get us anywhere ... that's what is depressing. 'Not fit to be a Labour MP'. Surely his constituents are the judges of that?John Rentoul @JohnRentoul 4m4 minutes ago
Depressing that it should need saying that Corbyn is not fit to be a Labour MP let alone a leadership candidate http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 41053.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
Calling into question Corbyns fitness to be a Labour MP is libel.rebeccariots2 wrote:This slur on slur rhetoric isn't going to get us anywhere ... that's what is depressing. 'Not fit to be a Labour MP'. Surely his constituents are the judges of that?John Rentoul @JohnRentoul 4m4 minutes ago
Depressing that it should need saying that Corbyn is not fit to be a Labour MP let alone a leadership candidate http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 41053.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
I find it depressing that some people consider Rentoul to be a journalist rather than a deeply average Cameron-fan boy .rebeccariots2 wrote:This slur on slur rhetoric isn't going to get us anywhere ... that's what is depressing. 'Not fit to be a Labour MP'. Surely his constituents are the judges of that?John Rentoul @JohnRentoul 4m4 minutes ago
Depressing that it should need saying that Corbyn is not fit to be a Labour MP let alone a leadership candidate http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 41053.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
Looking quickly as the IDS think tank report. Looks like "this charity do great things, not like those bad LAs".RogerOThornhill wrote:Anyone interesting in some of the reports that Kids Company have online?
http://www.kidsco.org.uk/about-us/annual-accounts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Includes a report by the IDS- founded Centre for Social Justice only last year.
I looked at the 2013 accounts - support from government amounts to £4.7m out of a total income of £23.1m so it's not as if there was no other money coming in.
IMO There needs to be a full investigation of what was going on - including in government about what concerns the DfE had and if they were followed up - if not then why not.
Yes, that's the impression I got too - the fallout from this might be quite embarrassing.Tubby Isaacs wrote:Looking quickly as the IDS think tank report. Looks like "this charity do great things, not like those bad LAs".RogerOThornhill wrote:Anyone interesting in some of the reports that Kids Company have online?
http://www.kidsco.org.uk/about-us/annual-accounts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Includes a report by the IDS- founded Centre for Social Justice only last year.
I looked at the 2013 accounts - support from government amounts to £4.7m out of a total income of £23.1m so it's not as if there was no other money coming in.
IMO There needs to be a full investigation of what was going on - including in government about what concerns the DfE had and if they were followed up - if not then why not.
