Wenesday 11th November 2015
Posted: Wed 11 Nov, 2015 7:10 am
Morning all.
They're in recess - again. Start back next Monday. And no, I have no idea why.TobyLatimer wrote:I hope Corbyn stands up at pmq's today and says
"I have a letter here from Ian in Bladon ...."
Of course they are. The first Wednesday in yonks I'm home and free to watch.......(is it because of Armistice Day?)RogerOThornhill wrote:They're in recess - again. Start back next Monday. And no, I have no idea why.TobyLatimer wrote:I hope Corbyn stands up at pmq's today and says
"I have a letter here from Ian in Bladon ...."
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.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.
Morning Hugo
Is anybody keeping count of all their nom de plumes?gilsey wrote:Thanks for the laugh RO'T.Morning Hugo
btl at the G.
But how many Tory seats are there to lose?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.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.
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.
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.RobertSnozers wrote: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.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;
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.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... itics-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;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.
From that 'article':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;
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?LadyCentauria wrote:From that 'article':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;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.’
Record employment we're continually told Willow, the Treasury should be flush with all that "extra" income tax.Willow904 wrote: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?LadyCentauria wrote:From that 'article':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;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.’
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.Willow904 wrote: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?LadyCentauria wrote:From that 'article':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;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.’
(Quote taken from Politics Live, Guardian.)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
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; …
That's a hysterical laugh.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;
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.StephenDolan wrote:Record employment we're continually told Willow, the Treasury should be flush with all that "extra" income tax.Willow904 wrote: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?LadyCentauria wrote: From that 'article':
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.
(cJA edit of image)StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.
Gordon Brown making a statement, cue the reaching for
[trolling-for-dummies]
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...
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.
(my bold)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
Magnificent.PorFavor wrote:Good morternoon.
I thought this was terrific (from Gordon Brown) -(Quote taken from Politics Live, Guardian.)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
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.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; …
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)
Hmmm. Do we have any faith in / respect for polls these days?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%