Tuesday 1st.September

[rebeccariots2]

Lawyers acting for the Save Me Trust today sent a letter before action to Natural England requiring them to revoke the licences to kill badgers held by the cull operators in Gloucestershire, Somerset and Dorset.

Badgers are a protected species. Unless an exception applies, killing a badger is a criminal offence under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. One exception is when the badger is killed for the purpose of preventing the spread of disease, and the killer has a licence issued by Natural England.

The Government has not sought to repeal or amend the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, so Natural England has to comply with it. It justifies issuing the licences on the grounds that the cull is for the purpose of preventing the spread of bovine tuberculosis in cattle.
The scientific consensus is that a badger cull can lead to a slight reduction in the incidence of bovine TB, but only if the cull is carried out professionally and thoroughly, using experienced field staff to trap the badgers in cages before shooting them. Anything less cannot be relied on to reduce the spread of bovine TB, and may well increase it, because the badgers that survive move around more and so have a greater opportunity to catch bovine TB or to pass it on.

Natural England has licenced contactors to shoot badgers in the field. In Gloucestershire and Somerset the contractors have entirely failed to carry out the kind of cull that could be expected to slightly reduce bovine TB, and there is a significant chance that their efforts have caused infections in farmers' herds, not prevented them. There is no reason to believe that their performance will improve this year, nor that the contractor in Dorset, who has just been issued with a licence, will fare any better. This means that the annual cull planned to begin in a matter of days cannot in any rational sense be said to be serving the purpose of preventing the spread of disease. It is therefore unlawful.

Natural England has thus far done the Government's bidding when it comes to issuing licences. The letter from the Save Me Trust sets out the reasons why the cull as it has licenced it cannot with any confidence be said to prevent disease. It also sets out ways in which Natural England has failed in its duty to consult the public before issuing licences.

The Save Me Trust calls on Natural England to do its duty under the legislation and revoke these unlawful licences to kill. This will stop a cull that has so far killed thousands of badgers for no good reason. If Natural England does not revoke the licences, then the Save Me Trust will take legal action to require Natural England to act within the law.

http://www.savemetrust.org/index.php/news/press-release" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Willow904]

Have just watched the C4 debate (some of). Very interesting. I'm glad I didn't put Cooper first, now, or I'd be regretting it. Her obsession with QE was embarrassing as Corbyn clearly stated he would also be willing to fund his investment bank (which I'm not aware any of the other candidates have disagreed with in principle) with government borrowing if more appropriate, as it would be at this point of time. She's right about inflation concerns with QE but the dire warnings about borrowing was pure Osbornomics and she is better than muddling up borrowing to cover day to day spending and borrowing for investment. Corbyn won hands down on the fact we have used QE before and his use for it is better for the wider economy than the way it has been used to date.

But that's no reason to use it again, with a recovery underway. That's being generous and calling Corbyn's stuff QE at all.

Corbyn's going to be borrowing more on day to day than anyone, I would think. Just in terms of public sector pay claims, he's going to be on a very sticky wicket. That is assuming his career hasn't been a complete sham so far. He couldn't even tell the FBU in 2002 that they were being stupid in going for a pay rise 6 or 7 times the rate of inflation.

In the context of funding an investment bank, Corbyn said he would use QE or government borrowing if more appropriate. Cooper wasn't arguing against borrowing for day to day funding, she was arguing against borrowing for capital investment - because she was arguing against what Corbyn has proposed generally rather than what he had just said. She didn't present her argument coherently at all and that's why I was disappointed.

[AngryAsWell]

What’s the difference between a migrant and a refugee?
Hint: The number of borders they have to cross is irrelevant

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/wh ... ee-6362068" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Love her or hate her - she's spot on with this one.

[rebeccariots2]

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 5m5 minutes ago
Climbdown No. 2 on Euro-referendum coming from PM tomorrow, Sky sources tell me. No taxpayers' money for Yes campaign & "Purdah" imposed.

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 4m4 minutes ago
Govt was facing potential defeat in Commons vote on Mon, with up to 40 Tory MPs set to vote for Labour "purdah" amdt to EU Rederendum Bill.

Cameron's desperate to keep the awkward squad on board.

[HindleA]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... CMP=twt_gu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We must all work with Jeremy Corbyn, says Chuka Umunna

[HindleA]

Cannot help it,but I always think of Chaka Khan when reading his name.

[citizenJA]

Well, everyone's interested in investment- the last government (albeit by bringing forward some stuff) achieved the highest level of infrastructure spending since 1975, per the IFS.

The FBU 2002 example was the one that came to mind, though it was an odd one, with the competence of the leadership being as much as an issue as left or right. The General Secretary was booted out in the next election. But I can't recall Corbyn being prominent in many battles to control current spending, aside from Defence cuts.

(my bold)

Did Tory government keep the receipt for the infrastructure spending?
Because it should be returned from wherever it was expensively bought.
Local businesses making higher quality goods, employing local people will give the country a better deal.
It'll cost less too.

[citizenJA]

Lawyers acting for the Save Me Trust today sent a letter before action to Natural England requiring them to revoke the licences to kill badgers held by the cull operators in Gloucestershire, Somerset and Dorset.

Badgers are a protected species. Unless an exception applies, killing a badger is a criminal offence under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. One exception is when the badger is killed for the purpose of preventing the spread of disease, and the killer has a licence issued by Natural England.

The Government has not sought to repeal or amend the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, so Natural England has to comply with it. It justifies issuing the licences on the grounds that the cull is for the purpose of preventing the spread of bovine tuberculosis in cattle.
The scientific consensus is that a badger cull can lead to a slight reduction in the incidence of bovine TB, but only if the cull is carried out professionally and thoroughly, using experienced field staff to trap the badgers in cages before shooting them. Anything less cannot be relied on to reduce the spread of bovine TB, and may well increase it, because the badgers that survive move around more and so have a greater opportunity to catch bovine TB or to pass it on.

Natural England has licenced contactors to shoot badgers in the field. In Gloucestershire and Somerset the contractors have entirely failed to carry out the kind of cull that could be expected to slightly reduce bovine TB, and there is a significant chance that their efforts have caused infections in farmers' herds, not prevented them. There is no reason to believe that their performance will improve this year, nor that the contractor in Dorset, who has just been issued with a licence, will fare any better. This means that the annual cull planned to begin in a matter of days cannot in any rational sense be said to be serving the purpose of preventing the spread of disease. It is therefore unlawful.

Natural England has thus far done the Government's bidding when it comes to issuing licences. The letter from the Save Me Trust sets out the reasons why the cull as it has licenced it cannot with any confidence be said to prevent disease. It also sets out ways in which Natural England has failed in its duty to consult the public before issuing licences.

The Save Me Trust calls on Natural England to do its duty under the legislation and revoke these unlawful licences to kill. This will stop a cull that has so far killed thousands of badgers for no good reason. If Natural England does not revoke the licences, then the Save Me Trust will take legal action to require Natural England to act within the law.

http://www.savemetrust.org/index.php/news/press-release" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good.

[HindleA]

Long day,got more than expected done though.Shower (you didn't need to know that)then bed.Goodnight.

[AngryAsWell]

Long day,got more than expected done though.Shower (you didn't need to know that)then bed.Goodnight.

Goodnight xx

Edit to take smiley hug out - but have a {{0}} anyway

[citizenJA]

Goodnight, everyone.
love,
cJA

[Tubby Isaacs]

Well, everyone's interested in investment- the last government (albeit by bringing forward some stuff) achieved the highest level of infrastructure spending since 1975, per the IFS.

The FBU 2002 example was the one that came to mind, though it was an odd one, with the competence of the leadership being as much as an issue as left or right. The General Secretary was booted out in the next election. But I can't recall Corbyn being prominent in many battles to control current spending, aside from Defence cuts.

(my bold)

Did Tory government keep the receipt for the infrastructure spending?
Because it should be returned from wherever it was expensively bought.
Local businesses making higher quality goods, employing local people will give the country a better deal.
It'll cost less too.

Apol, I meant the last Labour government reached that high level of investment.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Cybernats are in town at the Guardian!

Seems to be increasing criticism of the SNP record on Education. None of the Cybernatters seem to defend it.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Cybernats are in town at the Guardian!

Seems to be increasing criticism of the SNP record on Education. None of the Cybernatters seem to defend it.

There are a few tartan chickens looking for a perching place at the moment. Not sure Sturgeon can keep them flying all the way to 2020.

[HindleA]

Not quite.
http://www.legalcheek.com/2015/09/uwe-a ... -1million/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


UWE and ULaw students overturn 95% of Department of Work and Pensions ‘fit for work’ decisions — hauling in £1million

[Tubby Isaacs]

Cybernats are in town at the Guardian!

Seems to be increasing criticism of the SNP record on Education. None of the Cybernatters seem to defend it.

There are a few tartan chickens looking for a perching place at the moment. Not sure Sturgeon can keep them flying all the way to 2020.

Is she going to ask "social democratic" Scotland "with its different society" to pay more tax at any point?

Good line she's got in "this nice thing comes from the Scottish Government". That basically means Westminster. The same Westminster which is mentioned when she can't afford something.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Not quite.
http://www.legalcheek.com/2015/09/uwe-a ... -1million/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


UWE and ULaw students overturn 95% of Department of Work and Pensions ‘fit for work’ decisions — hauling in £1million

Thank you, a reminder that just sometimes good people can get a result.

[LadyCentauria]

Not quite.
http://www.legalcheek.com/2015/09/uwe-a ... -1million/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


UWE and ULaw students overturn 95% of Department of Work and Pensions ‘fit for work’ decisions — hauling in £1million

Thank you, a reminder that just sometimes good people can get a result.

That's excellent news and a great thing for the students to do. Law students from the University of Wolverhampton are lending their help, too:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/students- ... rn-6232031 (link was given in the comments on @HindleA's article)

[HindleA]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-w ... ols-pledge" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PM: We will not waver in free schools pledge


FFS

[HindleA]

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


What’s wrong with a pedalo ride if it makes you well?
Christina Patterson

Spot on article IMHO


I remember the Torygraph going apopleptic in an article about personal budgets and what they were used for in lieu of daycentres/local authority provision,and the running misanthropic thread of "free cars" via DLA is always apparent in any discussion.Beyond their wit apparently is the recognition that choice and financial sense are not mutually exclusive or perhaps they prefer previous institutionalism and proscribed provision at increased costs.

[utopiandreams]

Long day,got more than expected done though.Shower (you didn't need to know that)then bed.Goodnight.

Of course we did, A. We need to know you're doing as well as can be expected. Things may become just an iota steadier after Friday. Hopefully there should at least be some good humour assuming there is a wake, of course. It doesn't need to be formal, just a few friends drinking in honour of her life works wonders.

'And for my part I hope my deed for today shall surpass refraining from bashing a angry man's loins wuth my car door.

[utopiandreams]

Cybernats are in town at the Guardian!

Seems to be increasing criticism of the SNP record on Education. None of the Cybernatters seem to defend it.

Thanks, Tubby, I quite fancy some shortbread with strawberry conserve.

[LadyCentauria]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-w ... ols-pledge

PM: We will not waver in free schools pledge


FFS

Policy Exchange research shows that as well as providing an excellent education to their own pupils, they are also associated with improvements in local poorly-performing schools. And more than two-thirds of free school heads say they are having a positive impact on schools in their local area – driving up standards and ensuring more parents have a great school in their neighbourhood.

Yeah, well, they would, wouldn't they...
And this press release repeats the claim that Free Schools, "are also more likely to be rated ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted than other schools," a claim which I thought has been more than adequately disproven. Or is it only Academies that are not as likely as Local Authority-controlled schools to be rated 'outstanding' once they've actually been open long enough to get inspected?

[utopiandreams]

Ken Livingstone on Hard Talk this morning., speaking of Corbynmania as it's been called by some... oh, and some other guy. Neoliberalism is being challenged. About time! I'll try to pay it attention now.

[utopiandreams]

Thankyou, Ken, critical of a world of Thatchersm and Reaganism? Sounds like he's talking my language!

[utopiandreams]

The other guy is Charles Clarke, former Home Secretary, with a somewhat more reticent view. Worth a watch, there is both agreement and some measure of caution.

[utopiandreams]

Would you believe that as I was out and about this morning I had some idiots hanging onto my rear bumper in both directions. As I told my son, they can sit there staring at my brake lights if they like but I hardly use them, being one to use my gears and generally pace myself to the conditions and any obstacle. Still at least there'll be no sudden movements excepting an emergency and then I began to ponder the events of yesterday, as you do.

Assuming it were not a case of mistaken identity, the only thing I could think was that perhaps an oncoming vehicle had stopped to allow his wife through a section of road with parked vehicles with me some way behind. It is possible in such circumstances that I would have closed the gap by the time she had passed them, thereby allowing the other's progress. It's all about the flow. If that caused anxiety than so be it, I can only assume that should she have a nervous disposition, much of the responsibility is his own.

I did notice that he paid quite some attention to the damage to my front wing, using head gestures and his eyes to guide my attention as though he were intimating what a crap driver I was. Yeah it and my rear wing too are a source of discomfort and embarrassment but I'm past the stage of constant repairs the number of times my car has been hit. The last time I had major damage sorted, both wings had at separate times been hit within a fortnight. It sounds silly now but at the time it caused me undue levels of anxiety, despair even. Maybe I shall have them repaired soon, the landlords have recently removed obstructions from behind the building allowing more parking room (a guy in a flat round the back already uses it). I had tried parking there but the other spaces are below a tree. Bird crap anyone?

Which brings me neatly onto my discussion with one of the landlords the other day. I'd got him and one of his contracted workmen to get on my roof to examine a gully between two pitched rooves, one I had recently cleared of a builder's bucketful of muck and relocated a slipped slate; still catching drips but only when it rains... and still no word from the plumber who was to attend a leaking toilet cistern and the exceptionally noisy pipes when the flush is used, so much so I fill a bucket from a bathtap late at night. I've even had the bath panels off for weeks now having tried a full pack of washup sponges to no avail.

Anyway a couple of months back the place was surveyed for wall cladding insulation to relieve the condensation problems and should it be done then my rear windows and door to the roof terrace need replacing; the other flats being done between tenancies. So I wanted to lay my cards on the table; I have a rolling short term tenancy agreement but to be fair have had no increases in rent. All the white goods are my own and I am responsible for internal decor although I admit I do not adhere to anything like the standards I had in my own property.

When I took this place on I knew my daughter was being otherwise accommodated and that given time my lads would move on, as indeed they did. I may miss a garden but frankly not the maintenance given my back and for a flat a roof terrace has much going for it. In other words if the place were upgrade it's ideal for me, a park up the hill, open fields largely used for sport almost opposite and a supermarket plus small retail development below. 'And slowly but surely I am beginning to find my feet again, even little one takes me by my hand to the shops occasionally. albeit to get something for her as often as not. Nothing wrong with a pound shop when it comes to coloured sticky plastic (otherwise known as insulating tape) and other assorted sundries to mess about with.

Where I stood. My sons are always telling me to get out of such a shit-hole and to be honest in many ways it is. Since my youngest is back with me and working he has volunteered that we should move on. I point blank refuse because he has his own life to lead and wtf do I do when he wants a woman? Besides I really don't want to do much until he's cleared out (I do have some money behind me because of my pension pot albeit nothing substantial) and much of the clutter is my sons, including eldest who I've told to come sort it, several hundred DVDs for starters that he may as well eBay or something, not to mention old game consoles and corresponding discs.

So please landlords upgrade the exterior and insulation and I don't mind refurbishing the interior, up to a point. Perhaps we can agree something regarding rent and the costs of bathroom, kitchen, etc. as they have the workforce but I would of course expect far greater security of tenure. My point, largely aimed at government ignorance is this is my home but because it's not mine and I can be out with little notice why the fuck should I bother? 'And the tree? Sad though it is in some ways, there are plenty of others around. I could have my car fixed, which would be nice.

Now I believe I had some document to study although I may just copy this over on Wednesday. Cheers and a good morning to you all.

Postscript: perhaps I'd be able to get direct debit billing for my gas and electric too should I have better than is typical tenancy agreement instead of these darned expensive prepayment meters. So Fat Dave I didn't hear you speaking of tenant security, unlike Ed before the last election.