Wenesday 11th November 2015

Post by **refitman** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 7:10 am

Morning all.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 8:03 am

Hurrah ! Iain has saved us ! Why am i not surprised

Osborne two legs bad etc .

Significant victory for Duncan Smith

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... anges.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 8:09 am

It's a good job Dave knows what he's doing

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

: ScreenShot00960.jpg (91.92 KiB) Viewed 9364 times

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 8:24 am

Have deleted image of Cameron's letter about Oxfordshire county council's budget as it was too big.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 8:30 am

I hope Corbyn stands up at pmq's today and says

"I have a letter here from Ian in Bladon ...."

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 8:35 am

Cameron must have picked up some tips from Nick Clegg.
The Lib Dems in Wales were always having a go at the Welsh Government & councils about cuts, conveniently ignoring the effect of their party in the Coalition's policies.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 8:41 am

TobyLatimer wrote:I hope Corbyn stands up at pmq's today and says

"I have a letter here from Ian in Bladon ...."

They're in recess - again. Start back next Monday. And no, I have no idea why.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 9:01 am

Cheers Roger, i didn't know that.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 9:12 am

RogerOThornhill wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:I hope Corbyn stands up at pmq's today and says

"I have a letter here from Ian in Bladon ...."
They're in recess - again. Start back next Monday. And no, I have no idea why.

Of course they are. The first Wednesday in yonks I'm home and free to watch.......(is it because of Armistice Day?)

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 9:41 am

Morning all.

Gordon Brown making a statement, cue the reaching for

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 9:48 am

Morning.

From today's Waugh Zone email:

HEALTH, WEALTHY AND PRIZED

The Times and British Medical Journal have an excellent joint scoop. Groups of family doctors who control local NHS budgets have handed at least £2.4 billion of taxpayers’ money to organisations that their members own or work for.

Under reforms introduced by Andrew Lansley £67 billion is given to 211 GP-led clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) each year to buy services for local patients. Each group is run by a board made up of a majority of GPs with other medics and lay members.

Now, using Freedom of Information laws and public board papers, the Times and BMJ have discovered that 50 out of 151 CCGs had given at least one highly prized contract to enterprises in which members of their governing body had declared interests. The DoH says a national audit is under way, but it’s not a good look.

Quick - we must get rid of those pesky FOIs - they're far too revealing of what everyone suspects anyway. What's that you say ... oh, Grayling's already on it is he ... good man, good man ... always ready to do the dirty and unthinkable.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 9:48 am

Not sure what to make of this, especially as it is not due to be screened till next year.

Crickhowell - the town that went offshore.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 28971.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 10:11 am

Was so interested to watch the programme about Olympus, some one posted a heads up on this a few days ago, who. ever you are, thankyou!

Noticed Ephie on fire this morning asking the burning questions about our political unanswerables! Or is undiscussables the right word? The words austerity and deficit do not even start to explain the dark science (or is it art) of what we know is happening but cannot yet see. I've yet to see any economist brave enough to present any equations based upon credible possibilities, though many can and do speak of ways out of this mess. It is odd though that. as soon as these questions are asked it is as though the world has turned profoundly deaf. Or at least this part of it.

Have to agree with all those who do not see Cameron as just being a rich nitwit who doesnt understand consequences. He is undoubtedly the laziest of politicians Ive ever seen, he always seemed that way, but not unaware of what he is inflicting on us, he and his pals have been laughing from the front benches for over five years, at the expense of us all.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 10:14 am

I have to go out before I metaphorically murder Ros Altmann who is winding me up something rotten with her whiney 'There is nothing I can do' about women who have lost out under the new flat rate state pension. What a turncoat.

Stressful breakfast as I looked up mid mouthful of toast to see a cow looming in at the porch. They'd trampled down the fence. Just the one had invaded but we've been out there propping up fence so the other hundred or so don't follow. Will have to get hold of Robert the farmer on my way to work.

See you later.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 10:23 am

Thanks for the laugh RO'T.

Morning Hugo

btl at the G.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 10:29 am

Oh, good luck, RR, one sounds surprising, but a hundred or so! Hope it is sorted out soon.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 10:49 am

Unemployment figures.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_421089.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

North East, Wales & Scotland all increased.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 10:50 am

gilsey wrote:Thanks for the laugh RO'T.
Morning Hugo

btl at the G.

Is anybody keeping count of all their nom de plumes?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 10:59 am

gilsey wrote:Unemployment figures.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_421089.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

North East, Wales & Scotland all increased.

But how many Tory seats are there to lose?

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 11:01 am

A couple of days away from being on topic, and a year or more old, this popped into view today, I'm posting it for those who may be interested, these are things I never knew.

How did world war one end?

http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-bl ... d-war/1240" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 11:17 am

Its an interesting piece (as is usual with Mason) but some of the comments provide a bit of balance. Germany had all but lost the war by late 1918 anyway.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 12:08 pm

SC - not on fire so much as smouldering a bit......when I'm better, there might just be a conflagraton......

This pain is a bugger.
Can't shift it.
Sick of soup.

I WANT TOAST AND LOTS OF PROPER WELSH SALTED BUTTER.

So there.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 12:13 pm

gilsey wrote:Unemployment figures.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_421089.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

North East, Wales & Scotland all increased.

The devil is in the detail. 16-24 yr old NEETs, 922,000.

Approximately 19 million economically inactive 16-64 year olds.

The amount of women and under 24 year olds on zero hours contracts.

The vast disparity between average earnings and benefit level incomes, in or out of work.

Using 1971 as a comparator to 2015.

And look how those pesky non-EU worker numbers are falling.

I know it is the way they do things, but they change the inclusion criteria for various categories over time. I'm not saying any figure is wrong, but rather that successive governments and even international bodies tailor the way statistics are measured to suit either their needs or the needs of the time. They are not absolute. It doesnt take a statisttician for instance to tell us that there are big differences between the 1970s and now, even for those who lived those years they seem a very different place, not just time, and for the young they must seem incredibly dated. A single factor, women, makes the comparison skewed, and there others.

We have for instance the best educated working population ever, in spite of what we are told. So you'd expect a lot better, a huge increase in entrepreneurs, much more innovation, an increase in new products, jobs, ways of working, etc. That isnt happening here, except in privileged pockets, but it is happening elsewhere.

Government use of statistics like these to prove their success is unreal, like the person who keeps on putting on weight while at the same time regularly announcing how much weight they have lost in the last few weeks.

Other interesting things to note, unpaid family workers and how they are represented, and what constitutes being unemployed , probably not new to people, but interesting anyway.

Edited to say, The figure I gave of 19 million approximately economically inactive people should probably read 'true or real' economically inactive people as it is a composite figure derived from the circular graph in the link I responded to. It does not include people over 65 and retired.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 12:37 pm

ephemerid wrote:SC - not on fire so much as smouldering a bit......when I'm better, there might just be a conflagraton......

This pain is a bugger.
Can't shift it.
Sick of soup.

I WANT TOAST AND LOTS OF PROPER WELSH SALTED BUTTER.

So there.

Your smouldering is the equivalent to others conflagration!

In the absence of what I fancy I've taken to ruminating on virtual food, it only uses bandwidth. The more exotic and unobtainable the better. Don't know how capable you currently are, but the all time best pain distractor is getting into the zone writing, painting etc. But not useful if not possible for you now. I seem to remember you mentioning a painting....

Your missing zeros btw very useful for getting people to work things out for themselves, the sums are staggering. If people properly understood them in a tangible visceral way (like being punched) there really would be a conflagration. I've never actually had a thousand quid in my pocket, but understand that unless a protagonist looks or is really dangerous most people wouldnt hand it over lightly.

Pain is a bugger, and you know enough to be managing it in the best way.
Wishing you easier times soon. xxx

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 12:58 pm

You will kneel

: CThc4FbWUAAG3zC.jpg (62.31 KiB) Viewed 9076 times

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 1:02 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:A couple of days away from being on topic, and a year or more old, this popped into view today, I'm posting it for those who may be interested, these are things I never knew.

How did world war one end?

http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-bl ... d-war/1240" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Interesting, and contains a great deal of truth, but the emphasis concerns me. In attributing the end of the war substantially to the mutiny of the High Seas Fleet, the author comes dangerously close to endorsing the 'stab in the back' myth, which the Nazis employed to suggest that it was betrayal at home (by socialists, Jews etc) and not defeat on the battlefield that lost Germay the war. By 1918, the High Seas Fleet was irrelevant. It had largely been bottled up in port after the Battle of Jutland, and its existence had done nothing to contribute to the blockade of Britain, which might have caused the UK to withdraw from the war. Germany was starving to death, and conditions and morale in the fleet were appalling - it is not clear that without this pressure, the mutiny would have taken place. The so-called 'death ride' was not a death-or-glory operation, it was an attempt to assert that Germany still had some military strength in order to influence negotiations.

On the other hand, after the Battle of Amiens, the Germany army was retreating on every part of the Western Front. It had no more reserves while the Allies could now count on large numbers of US troops arriving throughout 1918-19 (plus British troops from home service and the Middle East). Germany had one last throw of the dice, the Spring 1918 offensive, to end the war and it failed, leading to widespread reversals before a resurgent and confident Allied counter-attack. I believe I'm right in saying that the German army fell back every day from the end of August to the armistice in November. It was not a question of if the Germans would be pushed out of France entirely, but when, and there would have been precious little to stop the Allies rolling right over Germany if they'd wanted to. The surrender was unconditional because Germany didn't have any choice in the matter. Beware of folk saying Germany was not defeated militarily in WW1 - their agenda is usually suspect.

Yes, I agree, but the perspective, of being inside where German workers were is interesting, and a contributary narrative that is not usually heard, because of course it is ordinary people who are called upon to do most of the dying. And the narrative of victors not that pure. I was brought up in a hailstorm of anti German feeling that was still strong in 1963 when I left and then got given an armful of different views. If not for having had a couple of very good teachers who were German and jewish, I might have had the same anti European feelings we still hear today. Those long shadows exist. These polarities dehumanise the 'enemy', but this article re-humanises them, makes them not that dissimilar, turns them back into people. Of course, there are other things that do that, and reason and enquiry, inside and outside of education, do too. I won't talk about the deficiencies in history teaching here, they are many and obvious, unless you are not really educated to be a critical thinker. Military history and social history don't share the same face.

The defeat of course was military, but the social elements regarding their inability to sustain their military effectiveness can't be disregarded, it was after all a war in which both sides extravagantly wasted the lives of ordinary people for the worst of motives.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 1:12 pm

Unemployment fell by 103,000 between July and September to 1.75m - or 5.3%.
The claimant count last month increased by 3,300 to 795,500.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... itics-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Am I right in thinking that's the second month in a row that unemployment has fallen but the claimant count has actually gone up? I might check.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 1:23 pm

You used to know how bad uunemployment was by the the length of the signing on queues and how far they stretched outside the dole office, today you can't see that because signing times are tightly controlled to the minute, and sanctions applied to those who miss them.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 1:35 pm

I've checked and it seems the claimant count has been inching up since August. It could be because more people are claiming UC and, like everything else associated with UC, the data for those unemployed rather than working on UC isn't robust. It might be worth keeping an eye on, though, because it's out of step with a general fall in unemployment.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 1:36 pm

Oh, and people are hanging onto their phones to find out whether or not they will be required to work. That has a certain resonance too.

744, 000 on zero hours contracts working an average of 25 hours a a week, am presuming many of them on minimum wage which would give them well under 50% of average earnings, and this does not include those who are doing the same but are classified as in training, which is an ambiguous term, which could mean anything from coercion into unsustainable work to a real, but relatively rare apprenticeship. At the average point of 25 hours they are eligible for tax credits without which they are not likely to survive.

My heart sinks at the thought of the single people with children who are not eligible, who are having to survive cuts to top up benefits, child support, housing etc. and whose fates are being gambled on.

The majority of these workers are women, and unlikely to include the people who defend zero hours contract because lots of people who are self employed in well paying industries have a version of these kind of contracts too. They are more likely to be classified elsewhere.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 2:11 pm

Doesn't it state that the figures for UC arent really accurate because they aren't really in yet, Willow?

If the claimant count is rising but real unemployment cannot be disguised in the usual ways, that would account for the sudden and unexpected wide roll out of UC just announced. It is, from all accounts not ready or fit for purpose, but could cause enough statistical confusion for them to stumble on regardless, claiming their economic success, but will it take them into the middle of next year when the stakes are higher?

Oh, and calling them out on the 700,000 plus supposed vacancies. Why are so few real jobs to be found on UJM then? (Not a new question, but a more or less constant figure that is not borne out by the lived experience of claimants.)

LadyCentauria · Post by **LadyCentauria** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 2:39 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:Hurrah ! Iain has saved us ! Why am i not surprised

Osborne two legs bad etc .

Significant victory for Duncan Smith

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... anges.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From that 'article':

Frank Field, chairman of the committee, said: ‘No one has been able to provide the committee with a satisfactory series of mitigating policies to combat the impact of cuts in tax credits.
‘My advice to the Chancellor would be to pause and use the next 18 months to bring forward a major overhaul to abolish tax credits as we know them.’

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 2:57 pm

LadyCentauria wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:Hurrah ! Iain has saved us ! Why am i not surprised

Osborne two legs bad etc .

Significant victory for Duncan Smith

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... anges.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
From that 'article':
Frank Field, chairman of the committee, said: ‘No one has been able to provide the committee with a satisfactory series of mitigating policies to combat the impact of cuts in tax credits.
‘My advice to the Chancellor would be to pause and use the next 18 months to bring forward a major overhaul to abolish tax credits as we know them.’

It took a lot of time and money to get tax credits working. It's a pretty efficient way of tackling child poverty. Why does it need to be abolished? To save Osborne face because he wanted the money to fund tax cuts for the better off and got caught red handed? This is the most pathetic suggestion yet. Tax credits aren't the problem, inflexible Tory surplus plus tax cuts is the problem, easily solvable with no tax cuts and/or surplus. Has anyone even worked out how much Osborne is going to save in tax credits when the national living wage goes up and the amount people affected qualify for goes down? More people employed = less benefit paid. Higher wages = less benefit paid. How much is this worth and where's that money going, that's what I want to know. If the economy is back where it was before the crash, why isn't the tax credit bill?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:04 pm

Willow904 wrote:
LadyCentauria wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:Hurrah ! Iain has saved us ! Why am i not surprised

Osborne two legs bad etc .

Significant victory for Duncan Smith

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... anges.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
From that 'article':
Frank Field, chairman of the committee, said: ‘No one has been able to provide the committee with a satisfactory series of mitigating policies to combat the impact of cuts in tax credits.
‘My advice to the Chancellor would be to pause and use the next 18 months to bring forward a major overhaul to abolish tax credits as we know them.’
It took a lot of time and money to get tax credits working. It's a pretty efficient way of tackling child poverty. Why does it need to be abolished? To save Osborne face because he wanted the money to fund tax cuts for the better off and got caught red handed? This is the most pathetic suggestion yet. Tax credits aren't the problem, inflexible Tory surplus plus tax cuts is the problem, easily solvable with no tax cuts and/or surplus. Has anyone even worked out how much Osborne is going to save in tax credits when the national living wage goes up and the amount people affected qualify for goes down? More people employed = less benefit paid. Higher wages = less benefit paid. How much is this worth and where's that money going, that's what I want to know. If the economy is back where it was before the crash, why isn't the tax credit bill?

Record employment we're continually told Willow, the Treasury should be flush with all that "extra" income tax.

The finances are improving at such a rate of knots and ditto the employment figures that Carney will surely be raising interest rates anytime now, yes? All criterion have been met, we are a safe haven from global financial matters. Followed closely by, the return of the AAA ratings.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:10 pm

Willow904 wrote:
LadyCentauria wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:Hurrah ! Iain has saved us ! Why am i not surprised

Osborne two legs bad etc .

Significant victory for Duncan Smith

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... anges.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
From that 'article':
Frank Field, chairman of the committee, said: ‘No one has been able to provide the committee with a satisfactory series of mitigating policies to combat the impact of cuts in tax credits.
‘My advice to the Chancellor would be to pause and use the next 18 months to bring forward a major overhaul to abolish tax credits as we know them.’
It took a lot of time and money to get tax credits working. It's a pretty efficient way of tackling child poverty. Why does it need to be abolished? To save Osborne face because he wanted the money to fund tax cuts for the better off and got caught red handed? This is the most pathetic suggestion yet. Tax credits aren't the problem, inflexible Tory surplus plus tax cuts is the problem, easily solvable with no tax cuts and/or surplus. Has anyone even worked out how much Osborne is going to save in tax credits when the national living wage goes up and the amount people affected qualify for goes down? More people employed = less benefit paid. Higher wages = less benefit paid. How much is this worth and where's that money going, that's what I want to know. If the economy is back where it was before the crash, why isn't the tax credit bill?

To give Martha Kearney her due that point that the tax credit cuts simply aren't necessary ... there are other, preferable to many people including many Tories, ways of finding the money ... came over loud and clear in her various WATO interviews on the subject. I have a growing respect for Stephen McPartland - refusing to meet David Gauke in his constituency today because of the way he feels about the tax credit cuts and child credit cuts. He actually said he had discovered that child credits are going to be cut in direct contradiction to the statements given by Cameron before the election and was clearly upset by that. I have zilch respect for Priti Patel - she sounds like she's eating boiled sweets that have been dunked in government messaging juice which has got a bit garbled up in her mouth as she chews so they come out in various odd, awkward, desperate, mashed up ways. She sounds stupid when she 'answers' - i.e. doesn't answer. And she never sounds the g on the end of 'ing'. It sounds horribly affected and drives me effin' mad.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:14 pm

Good morternoon.

I thought this was terrific (from Gordon Brown) -

George Eaton
✔
@georgeeaton

Brown: "There are two kinds of chancellors: those who fail and those who get out in time. He can make up his mind which he wants to be."
1:34 PM - 11 Nov 2015

9 9 Retweets
4

(Quote taken from Politics Live, Guardian.)

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:15 pm

Angela Eagle ‏@angelaeagle 19m19 minutes ago
Angela Eagle Retweeted Paul Waugh
Wirral has had much larger cuts to deal with than Oxfordshire Can we have a meeting with the No10 policy unit?

Paul WaughVerified account
‏@paulwaugh
If PM doesn't offer ALL council leaders a chat w his No.10 Policy Unit, will penultimate para be an abuse of power?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:21 pm

i100 ‏@thei100 11m11 minutes ago
Leader of the French far-right, Marine Le Pen, says David Cameron is her new role model http://i100.io/GbCVwYR" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's a hysterical laugh.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:25 pm

27 kids taken ill at Ripon http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... -yorkshire" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

: ScreenShot00964.jpg (93.88 KiB) Viewed 8912 times

In 1980 there were 300 collapsed near Mansfield, my mum was on duty at A&E when they were brought in for treatment

http://www.macearchive.org/Archive/Titl ... 51543.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:26 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
LadyCentauria wrote: From that 'article':
It took a lot of time and money to get tax credits working. It's a pretty efficient way of tackling child poverty. Why does it need to be abolished? To save Osborne face because he wanted the money to fund tax cuts for the better off and got caught red handed? This is the most pathetic suggestion yet. Tax credits aren't the problem, inflexible Tory surplus plus tax cuts is the problem, easily solvable with no tax cuts and/or surplus. Has anyone even worked out how much Osborne is going to save in tax credits when the national living wage goes up and the amount people affected qualify for goes down? More people employed = less benefit paid. Higher wages = less benefit paid. How much is this worth and where's that money going, that's what I want to know. If the economy is back where it was before the crash, why isn't the tax credit bill?
Record employment we're continually told Willow, the Treasury should be flush with all that "extra" income tax.

The finances are improving at such a rate of knots and ditto the employment figures that Carney will surely be raising interest rates anytime now, yes? All criterion have been met, we are a safe haven from global financial matters. Followed closely by, the return of the AAA ratings.

On WATO today someone actually said that the slowing of wage growth was a good thing because it meant Mr Carney didn't have to worry about inflation and wouldn't need to raise interest rates. How to contradict the narrative that wages are growing and all is rosy in the economy in one short sentence, eh. And the idea that Carney has any handle on inflation ... and that it might bear any relationship with him and the others on the committee putting up interest rates ... is now just laughable. I will believe interest rates are going to rise when Osborne shows a bit of humility.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:32 pm

Blimey - Sparrow has put up a very complimentary summary of Gordon Brown's speech on his blog. As well he should ... but still a pleasant surprise.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:41 pm

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Gordon Brown making a statement, cue the reaching for

[trolling-for-dummies]

(cJA edit of image)

I'm contemplating venturing over to give the thread a read.
Brown's article is excellent.

Good-afternoon, everyone.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:45 pm

Tory MP boycotts meeting with Treasury Minister over tax credits
Stephen McPartland has boycotted an “inappropriate” meeting with Treasury Minister David Gauke to show his opposition to proposed cuts to tax credits.
- See more at: https://www.politicshome.com/home-affai ... 4Yy8e.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Stevenage MP also claimed he has “uncovered” that the Government’s reforms to the in-work benefit will amount to a cut in child tax credits – breaking a pre-election vow by the Prime Minister.
Mr McPartland cites statistics from the House of Commons Library that show how a family will lose out from an overall cut to their maximum tax credit award.
The benefit, comprising working and child tax credits, will be reduced for families as a result of the decision to lower the threshold at which individuals begin losing tax credits and to increase the taper rate, which is the amount taken away in tax credits for every pound earnt.
Consequently, once a family has used up all their working tax credits they will then begin losing their child tax credits, the analysis suggests.
As a result, he claims that families earning on average £20,000 will see their maximum tax credit award reduced from 87% to 51% when the reforms come into effect next April.
In light of his findings, the Tory MP insisted it was now “very clear” that the Treasury must produce measures to temper the effect of the cuts.
Speaking later to the World at One, Mr McPartland explained why he boycotted a meeting with Mr Gauke, who was visiting his constituency to deliver a speech on the reforms to research and development tax credits.
“I just think that it’s inappropriate that a Treasury Minister is coming to Stevenage to talk about giving money away in tax credits to businesses, when as a member of the same Government I am trying to stop the disastrous impact that tax credit changes are going to have,” he said...

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:55 pm

Willow904 wrote:I've checked and it seems the claimant count has been inching up since August. It could be because more people are claiming UC and, like everything else associated with UC, the data for those unemployed rather than working on UC isn't robust. It might be worth keeping an eye on, though, because it's out of step with a general fall in unemployment.

The Claimant Count measures the number of people claiming unemployment related benefits. As explained at Section 9 of this statistical bulletin, the Claimant Count estimates are designated as experimental statistics. In this section of the bulletin we compare quarterly movements in unemployment with quarterly movements in the Claimant Count. Some claimants will not be classified as unemployed. For example, people in employment working fewer than 16 hours a week can be eligible to claim JSA depending on their income.

The unemployment estimates shown in this comparison exclude unemployed people in the 16 to 17 and 65 and over age groups as well as unemployed people aged from 18 to 24 in full-time education. This provides a more meaningful comparison with the Claimant Count than total unemployment because people in these population groups are not usually eligible to claim JSA.

When 3 month average estimates for the Claimant Count are compared with unemployment estimates for the same time periods and for the same population groups (people aged from 18 to 64 excluding 18 to 24 year olds in full-time education), between April to June 2015 and July to September 2015:

unemployment fell by 57,000

the Claimant Count fell by 6,000

http://ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lms/labour-ma ... mant-Count

(my bold)

Yes, ONS, I love your work dearly but the provisos, addendum, and revisions is daunting stuff.
I'm typically able to read these reports and understand a great but the quoted material above has been put through the meaningfulness extraction machine.
Someone, please help me out.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 3:58 pm

PorFavor wrote:Good morternoon.

I thought this was terrific (from Gordon Brown) -
George Eaton
✔
@georgeeaton

Brown: "There are two kinds of chancellors: those who fail and those who get out in time. He can make up his mind which he wants to be."
1:34 PM - 11 Nov 2015

9 9 Retweets
4
(Quote taken from Politics Live, Guardian.)

Magnificent.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 4:18 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Angela Eagle ‏@angelaeagle 19m19 minutes ago
Angela Eagle Retweeted Paul Waugh
Wirral has had much larger cuts to deal with than Oxfordshire Can we have a meeting with the No10 policy unit?

Paul WaughVerified account
‏@paulwaugh
If PM doesn't offer ALL council leaders a chat w his No.10 Policy Unit, will penultimate para be an abuse of power?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

I'd love a pound for every time we and other's have warned how out of touch these Tories are...And how blinkered Dave is when it comes to what different government departments are up to.

Proof if proof were needed that no one is joining up the dots.

But even worse in my book, all those Tory Councillors are going to continue with their slavish allegiance to rotten incompetent uncaring masters.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 4:30 pm

Has the real Andrew Sparrow just decided to come back?

And what’s Jeremy Corbyn been up to today? He’s been visiting a school a pre-school in Crawely[sic].

Louise Stewart
✔
@BBCLouise

I'm not convinced @jeremycorbyn knows all the words to Incy Wincy spider but good effort on the actions!
1:10 PM - 11 Nov 2015

The Mirror says this is “the most awkward thing you will see all day”. Nonsense. Anyone who’s had young children will empathise.

After all, it is not as if Corbyn were being asked to do anything really silly like - to imagine something so preposterous it could never take place in modern Britain - hopping around and kissing the Queen’s hand just to get access to top-level security briefings. (Politics Live, Guardian)

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 4:41 pm

Patrick O'Flynn Retweeted
General Election ‏@UKGE2020 7h7 hours ago
Yougov #EUref Poll

England

Remain 40%
Leave 43%

Scotland

Remain 55%
Leave 30%

Wales

Remain 42%
Leave 38%

Hmmm. Do we have any faith in / respect for polls these days?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 4:44 pm

Re: Dave's letter to his local council in Oxford:

Rick Glanvill ‏@RickGlanvill 8h8 hours ago

@Peston Can’t wait till PMQs. “I have a letter from David in Witney … ”

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 11 Nov, 2015 4:50 pm

My memories of thirty years ago on Merseyside rekindled as Roger Bannister(no not that one)standing against Dave Prentice for GS of Unison.Not sure what happened to his wife Elaine-having a search.